Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

16-6965 - Knights v. Legere et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
16-6965 - Knights v. Legere et al
February 3, 2017
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Plaintiff filed his Verified Complaint (the "Complaint") on December 18, 2016. (Compl.,ECF Doc. No. 1.) In the Complaint, Plaintiff purports to seek foreclosure upon liens he allegedly perfected on "[a]ll" of Defendants' property. (Id if 11). Plaintiff bases his alleged right to foreclose on an agreement he purports to have formed with Defendants on or aboutMarch 30, 2016. As alleged in the Complaint, the purported agreement (see Compl. Ex. B) is comprised of several unsolicited, unilateral communications from Plaintiff to Defendants asserting that Defendants owe him $285,550,000 and "agree[d] to the liquidation of private assets to satisfy the debt." Plaintiff does not allege that Defendants ever gave their affirmative assent to any such "agreement." Rather, in alleging that he and Defendants formed a binding contract, Knights relies entirely on a recital in the so-called agreement stating that Defendants' "failure to sufficiently respond" to his demands "constitutes... acceptance and/or approval of all the facts/claims made therein" (as well as on other, nearly identical formulations of this recital). Based on the foregoing, this action is dismissed, with prejudice, as frivolous. Fitzgerald, 221 F.3d at 362. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง1915 (a)(3) that any informa pauperis appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (See attachment for further details). Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 2/3/2017. (Basnight, Jasmine)