Editing Frivolous litigation (section)

==Examples==
===''Washington v. Alaimo''===
In ''Washington v. Alaimo''<ref>[https://scholar.google.ca/scholar_case?case=1617214866373867821&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr&sa=X&ei=nrNMUOe4NqaL0QH98oHoBg&ved=0CB4QgAMoADAA 934 F. Supp. 1395 (S.D. Ga. 1996)].</ref> the court listed more than seventy-five frivolous "motions" (a request for a court to issue an order), all of which required the attention of the Court, including the following:
* "Motion to Behoove an Inquisition"
* "Motion for [[Judex Delegatus]]"
* "Motion for Restoration of Sanity"
* "Motion for [[Deinstitutionalization]]"
* "Motion for [[Publicity]]"
* "Motion to Vacate Jurisdiction"
* "Motion for Cesset processus"
* "Motion for [[Nunc pro tunc]]"
* "Motion for [[Psychoanalysis]]"
* "Motion to Impeach [[Anthony Alaimo|Judge Alaimo]]"
* "Motion to Renounce [[Citizenship]]"
* "Motion to [[Exhume]] Body of Alex Hodgson"
* "Motion to Invoke and Execute Rule 15<ref>
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_15 Rule 15] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170705101116/https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_15 |date=2017-07-05 }}, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
</ref>—Retroactive Note: The Court's School Days are Over"
* "Motion for [[Sex reassignment surgery|Skin Change Operation]]"
* "Motion for Catered Food Services"
* "Motion to Kiss My Ass"

Washington, an inmate from Georgia, was eventually prohibited from filing any future lawsuits or motions in any district court unless he first posted a [[contempt of court|contempt]] bond of $1,500. To be deemed frivolous, a litigant's arguments must strike beyond the pale.<ref>Weblogger Chris Pearson quotes more extensively from ''Washington v. Alaimo'' in {{cite web |url=http://www.dumb-lawsuits.com/motion-to-kiss-my-ass |title=Motion to Kiss My Ass |date=13 December 2005 |publisher=dumb-lawsuits.com |access-date=2007-01-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070318105425/http://www.dumb-lawsuits.com/motion-to-kiss-my-ass/ |archive-date=18 March 2007 }}</ref>

===''Pearson v. Chung''===
In 2005, in ''[[Pearson v. Chung]]'', Roy Pearson, a [[Washington, D.C.]] judge, sued a [[dry cleaning]] business for $67 million for allegedly losing a pair of his pants. This case has been cited as an example of frivolous litigation.<ref>
{{cite news |title=The Great American Pants Suit |url=http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010225 |quote=It's nice to see that even the organized plaintiffs bar piously deplores Mr. Pearson's abuse of the law. It would be even nicer if they agreed to stop opposing reforms that would give the Chungs of the world a fighting chance the next time around. |work=Wall Street Journal |date=June 18, 2007 |access-date=2007-06-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070620154859/http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010225 |archive-date=2007-06-20 |url-status=live }}
</ref> According to Pearson, the dry cleaners lost his pants (which he brought in for a $10.50 alteration) and refused his demands for a large refund. Pearson believed that a sign saying "Satisfaction Guaranteed" in the window of the shop legally entitled him to a refund for the cost of the pants, estimated at $1,000. The $54 million total also included $2.0 million in "mental distress" and $15,000 which he estimated to be the cost of renting a car every weekend to go to another dry cleaners.<ref>
{{cite news |first=Marc |last=Fisher |title=Wearing Down the Judicial System With a Pair of Pants |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061302033.html |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |location=[[Washington, D.C.]] |issn=0190-8286 |page=B01 |date=14 June 2007 |access-date=2008-09-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110216153534/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061302033.html |archive-date=2011-02-16 |url-status=live }}
</ref> The court ultimately ruled against Pearson, whose judgeship was subsequently not renewed due to this case and several other actions he filed during his divorce, which were found to demonstrate a lack of "judicial temperament".<ref>
{{cite news |title=Judge Set to Lose Job, Sources Say |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/22/AR2007102202170.html?hpid=moreheadlines |newspaper=[[Washington Post]] |date=October 23, 2007 |first=Keith L. |last=Alexander |access-date=June 30, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160531020105/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/22/AR2007102202170.html?hpid=moreheadlines |archive-date=2016-05-31 |url-status=live }}
</ref>

===Jonathan Lee Riches===
In 2010, federal prosecutors asked a judge to help them stop [[Jonathan Lee Riches]] from filing any more lawsuits, arguing that his frequent filings were frivolous.<ref>{{cite news |agency=Associated Press |title=Feds seek to halt inmate's lawsuits |url=http://www.nbc11news.com/news/headlines/102885724.html |publisher=KKCO 11 News |date=14 September 2010 |access-date=2011-10-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160604231123/http://www.nbc11news.com/news/headlines/102885724.html |archive-date=4 June 2016 }}</ref>

===Gloria Dawn Ironbox===
In July 2013, the [[Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario]] dismissed a complaint laid by a man posing as Gloria Dawn Ironbox, a [[I Am Peter, Hear Me Roar|fictional feminist attorney]] on television series ''[[Family Guy]]''. The claimant alleged that a marketing scheme by [[A&W (Canada)|A&W Restaurants]] was "[[heteronormative]]", "[[phallocentric]]" and promoted "cross-sectional hegemony". Citing feelings of distress and alienation over the lack of "[[LGBT]]" representation in A&W naming conventions, he demanded $50,000 in damages for injury to dignity and self-respect as well as an order requiring A&W to adopt naming conventions which include non-traditional families.<ref>
{{cite news |url=https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/heteronormative-burger-family-no-threat-to-lgbt-rights-tribunal-says-after-receiving-outrageous-complaint |title=Heteronormative' Burger Family no threat to LGBT, rights tribunal says after receiving 'outrageous' complaint |work=National Post |date=2013-07-25 |access-date=2022-01-05 }}
</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrt/doc/2013/2013hrto1259/2013hrto1259.html|date=2013-07-19|title=Doe v. A & W Canada, 2013 HRTO 1259|access-date=2022-01-05|work=Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario|publisher=Canadian Legal Information Institute}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130928123856/http://o.canada.com:80/2013/07/25/gloria-ironbox-human-rights-complaint|url=http://o.canada.com:80/2013/07/25/gloria-ironbox-human-rights-complaint/|archive-date=2013-09-28|date=2013-07-05|access-date=2022-01-05|title=Fake lesbian feminist's human rights complaint against A&W dismissed|work=canada.com|author=Daro, Ishmael}}</ref> One such product the claimant demanded was the "Pillow Biter", described by the claimant as "a large, dark slab of meat stuffed firmly between two, white, clenched buns".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2013-07-19 |title=Doe v. A & W Canada, 2013 HRTO 1259 (CanLII) |url=https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrt/doc/2013/2013hrto1259/2013hrto1259.html |access-date=2024-06-04}}</ref>

===Sirgiorgio Sanford Clardy===
In January 2014, Sirgiorgio Sanford Clardy, who is serving a 100-year prison sentence for a beating of a prostitute and her customer,<ref name="Portland pimp who beat teen until ears bled, yelled expletives at jurors, gets 100 years">
{{cite web |url=http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/07/portland_pimp_who_beat_teen_un.html |title=Portland pimp who beat teen until ears bled, yelled expletives at jurors, gets 100 years |website=The Oregonian |date=July 19, 2013 |access-date=21 January 2014 |author=Green, Aimee |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140202095043/http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/07/portland_pimp_who_beat_teen_un.html |archive-date=2014-02-02 |url-status=live }}
</ref> filed a $100 million lawsuit against Nike, in which he claimed that [[Nike Inc.|Nike]] was partially responsible for the assault he committed. Clardy said that Nike should have placed a label in his Jordan shoes warning consumers that they could be used as a dangerous weapon. He was wearing a pair when he repeatedly stomped the face of a client who was trying to leave a Portland hotel without paying Clardy's prostitute in June 2012.<ref name="Portland pimp sues Nike for $100 million for lack of warning label after beating victim with Jordans">
{{cite web |url=http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/01/nike_sued_by_portland_pimp_for.html |title=Portland pimp sues Nike for $100 million for lack of warning label after beating victim with Jordans |website=The Oregonian |date=January 10, 2014 |access-date=21 January 2014 |author=Green, Aimee |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140121123422/http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/01/nike_sued_by_portland_pimp_for.html |archive-date=2014-01-21 |url-status=live }}
</ref> This lawsuit gained "considerable attention across the nation and the world".<ref>[https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2014/10/pimp_whose_100_million_suit_fa.html $100 million pimp suit] ''Oregon Live''</ref><ref name="Portland pimp story goes global after he sues Nike for lack of shoe warning label (links)">{{cite web |url=http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/01/post_395.html |title=Portland pimp story goes global after he sues Nike for lack of shoe warning label (with links) |website=The Oregonian |date=January 13, 2014 |access-date=21 January 2014 |author=Green, Aimee}}</ref>

===''Romine v. Stanton''===
In March 2016, James Romine, one-half of the independent video games developer [[Digital Homicide Studios]], sued video game critic [[James Stephanie Sterling]] for criticizing the games published under his studios' name, seeking $10 million in damages for "assault, libel, and slander" to Romine's business. He claimed that Sterling's coverage of his studio's game ''The Slaughtering Grounds'' as "Worst Game of 2014 Contender" was not protected under [[fair use]] law because he did not believe it was "fair" criticism. An additional lawsuit for $18 million was filed against 100 users on the Steam gaming platform for criticizing their games and business practices, which he had interpreted as "harassment". The judge issued a [[subpoena]] against [[Valve Corporation|Valve]] to disclose the identities of those 100 users. This resulted in Valve removing all published games from Digital Homicide Studios.<ref name="azcentral">{{cite web |author=White, Kaila |date=September 21, 2016 |title=Free speech or criminal harassment? |url=http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2016/09/21/yuma-digital-homicide-video-games-sue-users/90742572/.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161130182316/http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2016/09/21/yuma-digital-homicide-video-games-sue-users/90742572/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin= |archive-date=2016-11-30 |access-date=2024-06-04}}</ref> In addition, Romine filed the lawsuit as an individual and not as a corporation, so such criticism was protected under the right to freedom of speech. The case was dismissed [[with prejudice]] in February 2017.<ref name="Kotaku">
{{cite web | url = https://kotaku.com/court-throws-out-digital-homicides-case-against-critic-1792599942 | title = Court Throws Out Digital Homicide's Case Against Critic Jim Sterling | date = February 21, 2017 | author = D'Anastalso, Cecilia |work=[[Kotaku]]}}</ref> This case is also an example of abuse of [[DMCA]] takedown requests on [[YouTube]].<ref name="aaronkellylaw">
{{cite web |author=Kelly, Aaron |date=October 28, 2011 |title=Filing A False DMCA Consequences |url=http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/consequences-of-filing-a-false-dmca-takedown-request/.html}}{{Dead link|date=March 2019|bot=InternetArchiveBot|fix-attempted=yes}}
</ref>

===''Erik Estavillo vs Twitch, Inc''===
In June 2020, Erik Estavillo filed a lawsuit against [[Twitch (service)|Twitch]], claiming that the streaming platform was responsible for his [[sex addiction]], with damages of $25 million, which was to be split between him, Twitch Prime subscribers, and [[COVID-19]] charities.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://screenrant.com/twitch-lawsuit-sex-addict-female-streamers-simps/ | title=Twitch Faces a Ridiculous Lawsuit over "Scantily Clad Women" | website=[[Screen Rant]] | date=June 25, 2020 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.scribd.com/embeds/466824972/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&access_key=key-wMxT3AXK3NEPleS742o8 | title=Scribd }}</ref> He claimed that Twitch's "twisted programming and net code" made it "nearly impossible to use Twitch without being exposed to sexual content". Other claims included him "chafing his [[penis]] every day with [a [[fleshlight]]]" and causing a fire by [[ejaculating]] on his [[computer monitor]]. The filing contained pictures of the female Twitch streamers (such as [[Amouranth]] and [[Pokimane]]), who he wanted [[Deplatforming|banned from the platform]]. Estavillo had previously sued [[Blizzard (company)|Blizzard]], [[Microsoft]], [[Sony]], and [[Nintendo]]. All of these lawsuits were dismissed with prejudice.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.dexerto.com/general/twitch-sued-for-25m-over-suggestive-streamers-alinity-pokimane-more-1384008/ | title=Twitch sued for $25m over "suggestive" streamers Alinity, Pokimane, more | date=June 24, 2020 }}</ref> This case was dismissed as frivolous in January 2021.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://unicourt.com/case/ca-scl-erik-estavillo-vs-twitch-of-amazon-inc-1150915 | title=Erik Estavillo vs Twitch Interactive, Inc }}</ref>