Vexatious litigation
Encyclopedia
Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action
. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions
against the offender.
A single action, even a frivolous one, is not enough to raise a litigant to the level of being declared vexatious, though repeated and severe instances by a single lawyer
or firm
can result in eventual disbarment
.
Some jurisdiction
s have a list of vexatious litigants: people who have repeatedly abused the legal system. Because lawyers could be disbarred for participating in the abuse, vexatious litigants are often unable to retain legal counsel, and therefore represent themselves in court. Those on the list are usually either forbidden from any further legal action or required to obtain prior permission from a senior judge before taking any legal action. The process by which a person is added to the list varies among jurisdictions.
, the first in 1976. Then, in 1992, Justice John Toohey ran out of patience with Alan Skyring and Patrick Cusack's repeated attempts to have their argument that the Commonwealth did not have the power to issue paper money re-heard.
, seventeen people are on the New South Wales Supreme Court's vexatious litigants register. They include Drago Jambrecina, who took a building society to court 44 times, Dominic Wy Kanak of the Waverley Council, who launched 40 proceedings against an Olympic beach volleyball stadium at Bondi
, Pranay Bhatttacharya and Con Tsekouras..
, the process for having somebody declared a vexatious litigant is governed by the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005, which supplanted an earlier Act. Importantly, the Act defines a vexatious proceeding to include a proceeding brought without merit or any prospect of success, with the consequence that it is not necessary to prove the existence of any improper motive in order to obtain relief under the Act.
In recent years, Milton Conde
, John Labaj, Russell Mathews and Dayal Mansukhani have had their rights to litigate restricted by the Supreme Court of Queensland
.
—had been declared vexatious litigants since the law was introduced in 1930.
courts have the means of escalating the sanctions against a litigant who makes applications to the court that are "totally without merit":
Further applications totally without merit can lead to withdrawal of the right of appeal
. Harassment of the court and court officials can lead to a penal prohibition notice, prohibiting the litigant from contacting or approaching the court without permission.
HM Courts Service maintains a list of vexatious litigants.
, section 92(14), each province is vested with the power to enact and apply laws relating to the administration of justice within its own territory.
In Canada, Section 40 of the Federal Court Act and in Ontario Section 140 of the Courts of Justice Act, restrict the ability to introduce or continue proceedings for those who have instituted vexatious proceedings or conducted proceedings in a vexatious manner.
Under section 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure, all judicial courts and judges in Quebec are vested with "...all the powers necessary for the exercise of their jurisdiction". Furthermore, they may:
Section 46 vests a very broad power on judicial courts and judges to ensure that the administration of justice is conducted according to decorum and according to the remedial nature of justice. As the courts's decisions have shown it, the authority to declare a litigant as vexatious is directly tributary to the power conferred by section 46.
Cases illustrating the application of section 46 are numerous. Among them, there are: Nguiagain v. Commission de la fonction publique, in which the judge rejected the plaintiff's motion for a mandamus
to enjoin his union to revise the grievance that he had filed on the grounds that the motion was groundless and abusive; De Niverville c. Descôteaux, where an injunction was rendered declaring the respondent, disbarred lawyer Descôteaux, as a vexatious litigant due to the multiple unfounded and frivolous actions that he had sought against the plaintiff De Niverville; and in Fabrikant v. Corbin, a motion to declare the plaintiff Valery Fabrikant
as a vexatious litigant was granted to the defendant, Dr. Corbin. It must be noted that in all of the above cited cases, a litigant was only declared vexatious following a proceeding instated by the opposite party.
Moreover, section 46’s scope is limited to judicial courts and judges. Administrative tribunals are legislative creations and they can only exist and function within the limits that are imposed by law. Administrative tribunals in Quebec cannot declare a person a vexatious litigant.
As per section 90 of the Rules of Practice of the Superior Court of Québec in Civil Matters, such litigants are now indexed in a registry kept by the Chief Justice in the judiciary district of Montreal. Lawyer and author Claude Duchesnay has reported in May 2003 that a document on the Quebec attorney general’s intranet contains the name of 58 persons who must obtain permission prior to instating proceedings before the courts.
, a court may, of its own motion or on application, order that no proceedings, either of a certain type or at all, may be issued by a certain person without leave of that court or some other court, for a specified time, or indefinitely. Such an order is referred to in legal circles as an Isaac Wunder order
after Isaac Wunder who made several claims against the Hospitals Trust claiming sweepstakes
prizes, but the claims were found to be groundless and the case deemed frivolous or vexatious
. He was prohibited from taking further High Court proceedings in the action without leave of the court.
law a vexatious litigant is someone who does any of the following, most of which require that the litigant be proceeding pro se
, i.e., representing himself:
Appeals of an existing action do not count as “final determinations”. Appeals and writs that are related to a current action do not count as “final determinations” or additional determinations, because until all avenues of appeal have been exhausted the determinations cannot be construed as “final”. A judgment is final for all purposes when all avenues for direct review have been exhausted. Interlocutory decisions before a judgment cannot be considered “final determinations”. Docket lists show nothing about qualifying merit of interim motions (Id.)
To meet the unspecified criteria for "repeated" motions or litigations, the number must be much more than two, and the rule based on case law seems to be around 12. "While there is no bright line rule as to what constitutes “repeatedly,” most cases affirming the vexatious litigant designation involve situations where litigants have filed dozens of motions either during the pendency of an action or relating to the same judgment."
Repeated motions must be "so devoid of merit and be so frivolous that they can be described as a flagrant abuse of the system, have no reasonable probability of success, lack reasonable or probable cause or excuse, and are clearly meant to abuse the processes of the courts and to harass the adverse party than other litigants." Evidence that a litigant is a frequent plaintiff or defendant alone is insufficient to support a vexatious litigant designation. The moving party, in addition to demonstrating that the plaintiff is vexatious, must make an affirmative showing based on evidence that the case has little chance of prevailing on the merits. If the plaintiff is so determined, a bond may be required, and if the bond requirement is not met within a specified time period, a judgment of dismissal is ordered. A finding of vexatiousness is not an appealable order, but a dismissal for failure to post a bond requirement based on a judgment of vexatiousness is appealable.
Habeas petitions do not count towards vexatious litigant determination. Vexatiousness in Probate Actions are governed by a different standard (Cal. Prob. Code s. 1611).
Cause of action
In the law, a cause of action is a set of facts sufficient to justify a right to sue to obtain money, property, or the enforcement of a right against another party. The term also refers to the legal theory upon which a plaintiff brings suit...
. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions
Sanctions (law)
Sanctions are penalties or other means of enforcement used to provide incentives for obedience with the law, or with rules and regulations. Criminal sanctions can take the form of serious punishment, such as corporal or capital punishment, incarceration, or severe fines...
against the offender.
A single action, even a frivolous one, is not enough to raise a litigant to the level of being declared vexatious, though repeated and severe instances by a single lawyer
Lawyer
A lawyer, according to Black's Law Dictionary, is "a person learned in the law; as an attorney, counsel or solicitor; a person who is practicing law." Law is the system of rules of conduct established by the sovereign government of a society to correct wrongs, maintain the stability of political...
or firm
Law firm
A law firm is a business entity formed by one or more lawyers to engage in the practice of law. The primary service rendered by a law firm is to advise clients about their legal rights and responsibilities, and to represent clients in civil or criminal cases, business transactions, and other...
can result in eventual disbarment
Disbarment
Disbarment is the removal of a lawyer from a bar association or the practice of law, thus revoking his or her law license or admission to practice law...
.
Some jurisdiction
Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction is the practical authority granted to a formally constituted legal body or to a political leader to deal with and make pronouncements on legal matters and, by implication, to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility...
s have a list of vexatious litigants: people who have repeatedly abused the legal system. Because lawyers could be disbarred for participating in the abuse, vexatious litigants are often unable to retain legal counsel, and therefore represent themselves in court. Those on the list are usually either forbidden from any further legal action or required to obtain prior permission from a senior judge before taking any legal action. The process by which a person is added to the list varies among jurisdictions.
High Court
Only three people have ever been declared vexatious litigants in the High Court of AustraliaHigh Court of Australia
The High Court of Australia is the supreme court in the Australian court hierarchy and the final court of appeal in Australia. It has both original and appellate jurisdiction, has the power of judicial review over laws passed by the Parliament of Australia and the parliaments of the States, and...
, the first in 1976. Then, in 1992, Justice John Toohey ran out of patience with Alan Skyring and Patrick Cusack's repeated attempts to have their argument that the Commonwealth did not have the power to issue paper money re-heard.
New South Wales
In New South WalesNew South Wales
New South Wales is a state of :Australia, located in the east of the country. It is bordered by Queensland, Victoria and South Australia to the north, south and west respectively. To the east, the state is bordered by the Tasman Sea, which forms part of the Pacific Ocean. New South Wales...
, seventeen people are on the New South Wales Supreme Court's vexatious litigants register. They include Drago Jambrecina, who took a building society to court 44 times, Dominic Wy Kanak of the Waverley Council, who launched 40 proceedings against an Olympic beach volleyball stadium at Bondi
Bondi
Bondi could refer to:-Places in Australia:* Bondi Beach, New South Wales, a beach and suburb in Sydney, Australia* Bondi Junction, New South Wales, a suburb and commercial centre in Sydney, Australia* Bondi, New South Wales, a suburb in Sydney, Australia...
, Pranay Bhatttacharya and Con Tsekouras..
Queensland
In QueenslandQueensland
Queensland is a state of Australia, occupying the north-eastern section of the mainland continent. It is bordered by the Northern Territory, South Australia and New South Wales to the west, south-west and south respectively. To the east, Queensland is bordered by the Coral Sea and Pacific Ocean...
, the process for having somebody declared a vexatious litigant is governed by the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005, which supplanted an earlier Act. Importantly, the Act defines a vexatious proceeding to include a proceeding brought without merit or any prospect of success, with the consequence that it is not necessary to prove the existence of any improper motive in order to obtain relief under the Act.
In recent years, Milton Conde
John Byrne (judge)
Justice John Byrne is the Senior Judge Administrator of the Supreme Court of Queensland. Having been a judge of that court since 1989, he is one of the court’s most experienced judges.-Pre-judicial Career:...
, John Labaj, Russell Mathews and Dayal Mansukhani have had their rights to litigate restricted by the Supreme Court of Queensland
Supreme Court of Queensland
The Supreme Court of Queensland, which is based at the Law Courts Complex, is the superior court for the Australian State of Queensland and sits around the middle of the Australian court hierarchy...
.
Victoria
, only 13 people—including convicted mass-murderer Julian KnightJulian Knight
Julian Knight is the mass murderer who on 9 August 1987, shot dead seven people and injured 19 during a shooting spree in Clifton Hill, Victoria, Australia, in what became known in Australian history as the Hoddle Street Massacre....
—had been declared vexatious litigants since the law was introduced in 1930.
England
EnglishEngland
England is a country that is part of the United Kingdom. It shares land borders with Scotland to the north and Wales to the west; the Irish Sea is to the north west, the Celtic Sea to the south west, with the North Sea to the east and the English Channel to the south separating it from continental...
courts have the means of escalating the sanctions against a litigant who makes applications to the court that are "totally without merit":
- Limited civil restraint order (formerly a Grepe v. Loam Order) where two or more applications totally without merit are made in a single proceedings. No further application may be made in the proceedings without the permission of the court.
- Extended civil restraint order for "persistently vexatious behaviour" lasts for a specified period of no more than two years for "applications touching upon instant matters" and can only be granted by a judge of the Court of AppealCourt of Appeal of England and WalesThe Court of Appeal of England and Wales is the second most senior court in the English legal system, with only the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom above it...
, High Court or a designated civil judge. - General civil restraint order for a maximum of two years for all proceedings in the High Court or specified County CourtCounty CourtA county court is a court based in or with a jurisdiction covering one or more counties, which are administrative divisions within a country, not to be confused with the medieval system of county courts held by the High Sheriff of each county.-England and Wales:County Court matters can be lodged...
(s).
Further applications totally without merit can lead to withdrawal of the right of appeal
Appeal
An appeal is a petition for review of a case that has been decided by a court of law. The petition is made to a higher court for the purpose of overturning the lower court's decision....
. Harassment of the court and court officials can lead to a penal prohibition notice, prohibiting the litigant from contacting or approaching the court without permission.
HM Courts Service maintains a list of vexatious litigants.
Scotland
Under the Vexatious Actions (Scotland) Act 1898 the Lord Advocate can apply for an order to prevent any person accused of vexatious litigation from raising any and all legal proceedings "unless he obtains the leave of a judge sitting in the Outer House on the Bills in the Court of Session, having satisfied the judge that such legal proceeding is not vexatious." A list of people who have had such an order brought against them is published on the Scottish Courts website. As of April 2011 there are seven names on this list.Canada
Under the Constitution Act, 1867Constitution Act, 1867
The Constitution Act, 1867 , is a major part of Canada's Constitution. The Act created a federal dominion and defines much of the operation of the Government of Canada, including its federal structure, the House of Commons, the Senate, the justice system, and the taxation system...
, section 92(14), each province is vested with the power to enact and apply laws relating to the administration of justice within its own territory.
In Canada, Section 40 of the Federal Court Act and in Ontario Section 140 of the Courts of Justice Act, restrict the ability to introduce or continue proceedings for those who have instituted vexatious proceedings or conducted proceedings in a vexatious manner.
Quebec
In Quebec, the Code of Civil Procedure is the principal legislation that sets rules related to civil procedure.Under section 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure, all judicial courts and judges in Quebec are vested with "...all the powers necessary for the exercise of their jurisdiction". Furthermore, they may:
"…at any time and in all matters, whether in first instance or in appeal, issue orders to safeguard the rights of the parties, for such time and on such conditions as they may determine. As well, they may, in the matters brought before them, even on their own initiative, issue injunctions or reprimands, suppress writings or declare them libellous, and make such orders as are appropriate to deal with cases for which no specific remedy is provided by law."
Section 46 vests a very broad power on judicial courts and judges to ensure that the administration of justice is conducted according to decorum and according to the remedial nature of justice. As the courts's decisions have shown it, the authority to declare a litigant as vexatious is directly tributary to the power conferred by section 46.
Cases illustrating the application of section 46 are numerous. Among them, there are: Nguiagain v. Commission de la fonction publique, in which the judge rejected the plaintiff's motion for a mandamus
Mandamus
A writ of mandamus or mandamus , or sometimes mandate, is the name of one of the prerogative writs in the common law, and is "issued by a superior court to compel a lower court or a government officer to perform mandatory or purely ministerial duties correctly".Mandamus is a judicial remedy which...
to enjoin his union to revise the grievance that he had filed on the grounds that the motion was groundless and abusive; De Niverville c. Descôteaux, where an injunction was rendered declaring the respondent, disbarred lawyer Descôteaux, as a vexatious litigant due to the multiple unfounded and frivolous actions that he had sought against the plaintiff De Niverville; and in Fabrikant v. Corbin, a motion to declare the plaintiff Valery Fabrikant
Valery Fabrikant
Valery I. Fabrikant , is a Belarussian émigré and former associate professor of mechanical engineering at Concordia University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada...
as a vexatious litigant was granted to the defendant, Dr. Corbin. It must be noted that in all of the above cited cases, a litigant was only declared vexatious following a proceeding instated by the opposite party.
Moreover, section 46’s scope is limited to judicial courts and judges. Administrative tribunals are legislative creations and they can only exist and function within the limits that are imposed by law. Administrative tribunals in Quebec cannot declare a person a vexatious litigant.
As per section 90 of the Rules of Practice of the Superior Court of Québec in Civil Matters, such litigants are now indexed in a registry kept by the Chief Justice in the judiciary district of Montreal. Lawyer and author Claude Duchesnay has reported in May 2003 that a document on the Quebec attorney general’s intranet contains the name of 58 persons who must obtain permission prior to instating proceedings before the courts.
Ireland
In IrelandRepublic of Ireland
Ireland , described as the Republic of Ireland , is a sovereign state in Europe occupying approximately five-sixths of the island of the same name. Its capital is Dublin. Ireland, which had a population of 4.58 million in 2011, is a constitutional republic governed as a parliamentary democracy,...
, a court may, of its own motion or on application, order that no proceedings, either of a certain type or at all, may be issued by a certain person without leave of that court or some other court, for a specified time, or indefinitely. Such an order is referred to in legal circles as an Isaac Wunder order
Isaac Wunder order
An Isaac Wunder order is an order issued by an Irish court restricting the ability of a vexatious litigant to institute legal proceedings without leave from that or another court, whether for a specified period of time or indefinitely...
after Isaac Wunder who made several claims against the Hospitals Trust claiming sweepstakes
Sweepstakes
The United States consumer sales promotion known as a sweepstake has become associated with marketing promotions targeted toward both generating enthusiasm and providing incentive reactions among customers by enticing consumers to submit free entries into drawings of chance...
prizes, but the claims were found to be groundless and the case deemed frivolous or vexatious
Frivolous or vexatious
In the law of several jurisdictions, such as Ireland and New Zealand, frivolous or vexatious, when used to describe an action such as a complaint or a legal proceeding, is a term used to deny its being heard, or to dismiss or strike out any ensuing judicial or non-judicial processes.While the term...
. He was prohibited from taking further High Court proceedings in the action without leave of the court.
New Zealand
In New Zealand a litigant may be declared a Vexatious Litigant by a High Court Judge on the application of the Solicitor-General. A vexatious litigant must then apply to a High Court Judge for leave to commence any action. In practice the Solicitor-General only makes applications against people who have persistently and vexatiously sued the Crown.California
Under CaliforniaCalifornia
California is a state located on the West Coast of the United States. It is by far the most populous U.S. state, and the third-largest by land area...
law a vexatious litigant is someone who does any of the following, most of which require that the litigant be proceeding pro se
Pro se legal representation in the United States
Pro se legal representation means advocating on one's own behalf before a court, rather than being represented by a lawyer. This may occur in any court proceeding, whether one is the defendant or plaintiff in civil cases, and when one is a defendant in criminal cases. Pro se is a Latin phrase...
, i.e., representing himself:
- In the immediately preceding seven-year period has commenced, prosecuted, or maintained in propria persona at least five litigations other than in a small claims court that have been (i) finally determined adversely to the person or (ii) unjustifiably permitted to remain pending at least two years without having been brought to trial or hearing.
- After a litigation has been finally determined against the person, repeatedly relitigates or attempts to relitigate, in propria persona, either (i) the validity of the determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined or (ii) the cause of action, claim, controversy, or any of the issues of fact or law, determined or concluded by the final determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined.
- In any litigation while acting in propria persona, repeatedly files unmeritorious motions, pleadings, or other papers, conducts unnecessary discovery, or engages in other tactics that are frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay.
- Has previously been declared to be a vexatious litigant by any stateU.S. stateA U.S. state is any one of the 50 federated states of the United States of America that share sovereignty with the federal government. Because of this shared sovereignty, an American is a citizen both of the federal entity and of his or her state of domicile. Four states use the official title of...
or federal court of record in any action or proceeding based upon the same or substantially similar facts, transaction, or occurrence.
Appeals of an existing action do not count as “final determinations”. Appeals and writs that are related to a current action do not count as “final determinations” or additional determinations, because until all avenues of appeal have been exhausted the determinations cannot be construed as “final”. A judgment is final for all purposes when all avenues for direct review have been exhausted. Interlocutory decisions before a judgment cannot be considered “final determinations”. Docket lists show nothing about qualifying merit of interim motions (Id.)
To meet the unspecified criteria for "repeated" motions or litigations, the number must be much more than two, and the rule based on case law seems to be around 12. "While there is no bright line rule as to what constitutes “repeatedly,” most cases affirming the vexatious litigant designation involve situations where litigants have filed dozens of motions either during the pendency of an action or relating to the same judgment."
Repeated motions must be "so devoid of merit and be so frivolous that they can be described as a flagrant abuse of the system, have no reasonable probability of success, lack reasonable or probable cause or excuse, and are clearly meant to abuse the processes of the courts and to harass the adverse party than other litigants." Evidence that a litigant is a frequent plaintiff or defendant alone is insufficient to support a vexatious litigant designation. The moving party, in addition to demonstrating that the plaintiff is vexatious, must make an affirmative showing based on evidence that the case has little chance of prevailing on the merits. If the plaintiff is so determined, a bond may be required, and if the bond requirement is not met within a specified time period, a judgment of dismissal is ordered. A finding of vexatiousness is not an appealable order, but a dismissal for failure to post a bond requirement based on a judgment of vexatiousness is appealable.
Habeas petitions do not count towards vexatious litigant determination. Vexatiousness in Probate Actions are governed by a different standard (Cal. Prob. Code s. 1611).
Notable vexatious litigants
- The Church of ScientologyChurch of ScientologyThe Church of Scientology is an organization devoted to the practice and the promotion of the Scientology belief system. The Church of Scientology International is the Church of Scientology's parent organization, and is responsible for the overall ecclesiastical management, dissemination and...
. "Plaintiffs (Scientologists) have abused the federal court system by using it, inter alia, to destroy their opponents, rather than to resolve an actual dispute over trademark law or any other legal matter. This constitutes 'extraordinary, malicious, wanton and oppressive conduct.' As such, this case qualifies as an 'exceptional case' and fees should be awarded pursuant to the Lanham ActLanham ActThe Lanham Act is a piece of legislation that contains the federal statutes of trademark law in the United States. The Act prohibits a number of activities, including trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and false advertising.-History:Named for Representative Fritz G...
... It is abundantly clear that plaintiffs sought to harass the individual defendants and destroy the church defendants through massive over-litigation and other highly questionable litigation tactics. The Special MasterSpecial masterIn law, a special master is an authority appointed by a judge to make sure that judicial orders are actually followed.In England, at common law, there were "Masters in Chancery," who acted in aid of the Equity Courts. There were also "Masters in Lunacy," who conducted inquiries of the same nature...
has never seen a more glaring example of bad faith litigation than this." (RTC v. Robin Scott, U. S. District Court, Central District of California, No. 85-711-JMI (Bx) 85-7197-JMI (Bx), January 20, 1993, Memorandum of Decision). - David EastmanDavid EastmanDavid Harold Eastman is a former public servant from Canberra, Australia. In 1995 he was convicted of the murder of Australian Federal Police Assistant Commissioner Colin Winchester. On 10 January 1989, Eastman shot Winchester twice in the head at point blank range in the driveway of Winchester's...
convicted of the murder of Australian Federal PoliceAustralian Federal PoliceThe Australian Federal Police is the federal police agency of the Commonwealth of Australia. Although the AFP was created by the amalgamation in 1979 of three Commonwealth law enforcement agencies, it traces its history from Commonwealth law enforcement agencies dating back to the federation of...
Assistant Commissioner Colin WinchesterColin WinchesterColin Stanley Winchester APM, was an Assistant Commissioner in the Australian Federal Police . Winchester commanded ACT Police, the community policing component of the AFP Australian Federal Police responsible for the Australian Capital Territory.On 10 January 1989, at about 9:15 pm, he was...
whom he shot twice in the head at point blank range in the driveway of Winchester's home in Deakin, ACT. He was found guilty and was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for the murder. Eastman was tried in 1995, a process lasting 85 days. During the trial, Eastman repeatedly sacked his attorneys and eventually chose to represent himself. Eastman also abused the judge during his trial, and during later legal proceedings and appeals. Subsequent to his conviction, Eastman continuously appealed against his conviction, attempting to win a retrial on the basis that he was mentally unfit during his original trial. On 27 May 2009, Eastman was transferred from a NSW prison to the ACT's Alexander Maconochie Centre to see out his sentence. - Julian KnightJulian KnightJulian Knight is the mass murderer who on 9 August 1987, shot dead seven people and injured 19 during a shooting spree in Clifton Hill, Victoria, Australia, in what became known in Australian history as the Hoddle Street Massacre....
, convicted of the Hoddle Street massacreHoddle Street massacreThe Hoddle Street massacre is a spree killing that occurred on the evening of Sunday, 9 August 1987 in Hoddle Street, Clifton Hill, a suburb of Melbourne, Australia.The shootings resulted in the deaths of seven people, and serious injury to 19 others...
in Melbourne, Australia. Numerous actions, primarily seeking injunctions against the prison incarcerating him, cost the Victoria government over A$Australian dollarThe Australian dollar is the currency of the Commonwealth of Australia, including Christmas Island, Cocos Islands, and Norfolk Island, as well as the independent Pacific Island states of Kiribati, Nauru and Tuvalu...
250,000 directly, plus some A$128,000 in outside legal costs. - David James Lindsey, a MelbourneMelbourneMelbourne is the capital and most populous city in the state of Victoria, and the second most populous city in Australia. The Melbourne City Centre is the hub of the greater metropolitan area and the Census statistical division—of which "Melbourne" is the common name. As of June 2009, the greater...
man so declared after repeatedly suing doctors, insurance firms and companies such as Carlton & United BreweriesCarlton & United BreweriesCarlton & United Breweries is an Australian brewing company based in Abbotsford, a suburb of Melbourne, Victoria. In 1983 it became a wholly owned subsidiary of Elders IXL and CUB was delisted. In 1990, Elders IXL renamed to the Foster's Group, and in July 2004, CUB changed its name to Carlton and...
for smoking-related damages. On February 21, 2006, the Supreme Court of Appeal gave him leave to sue Philip MorrisPhilip Morris InternationalPhilip Morris International is an international tobacco company, with products sold in over 160 countries. In 2007, it held a 15.6% share of the international cigarette market outside of the USA and reported revenues net of excise taxes of $22.8 billion and operating income of $8.9 billion.Until...
, demonstrating that a vexatious litigant is not completely blocked from launching further court action. - Valery FabrikantValery FabrikantValery I. Fabrikant , is a Belarussian émigré and former associate professor of mechanical engineering at Concordia University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada...
, a former Concordia University professor serving a life sentence for the murders of four colleagues in 1992. - Francis 'Coyote' ShiversCoyote ShiversFrancis Coyote Shivers is a musician and actor.-Music and acting:Shivers produced the first single for the band Shadowy Men on a Shadowy Planet. The B-side to that single, "Having an Average Weekend", became the theme to the television show The Kids in the Hall...
, former husband of Bebe BuellBebe BuellBeverle Lorence "Bebe" Buell is an American fashion model and singer, and Playboy magazine's November 1974 Playmate of the Month. She is also known for dating rock musicians. She is actress Liv Tyler's mother from a brief relationship with Aerosmith vocalist Steven Tyler...
and Pauley PerrettePauley PerrettePauley Perrette is an American actress, best known for playing Abby Sciuto[p] on the U.S. TV series NCIS, a role that has made her the most popular actress on U.S. primetime television. She is also a published writer, a singer and civil rights advocate.-Early life:Perrette was born in New Orleans...
, deemed a Vexatious Litigant on August 27, 2008 by The Superior Court of Los Angeles County during a long ongoing trial between himself and Perrette. - Isaac Wunder, who gave his name to the Isaac Wunder orderIsaac Wunder orderAn Isaac Wunder order is an order issued by an Irish court restricting the ability of a vexatious litigant to institute legal proceedings without leave from that or another court, whether for a specified period of time or indefinitely...
which may be issued in IrelandRepublic of IrelandIreland , described as the Republic of Ireland , is a sovereign state in Europe occupying approximately five-sixths of the island of the same name. Its capital is Dublin. Ireland, which had a population of 4.58 million in 2011, is a constitutional republic governed as a parliamentary democracy,...
to vexatious litigants. - Richard Mack, after whom the Mack Bar, an order barring a litigant from making substantially any non-criminal filings within the court's jurisdiction, is named. In the course of his litigation, Mack made numerous frivolous petitions and motions, resulting in monetary sanctions. Mack initially failed to pay the sanctions. At one point, Mack set up his own corporation having the same name as the defendant against whom his was litigating, made payments to that corporation and then represented to the court that he had complied with the duty to pay. After the sanctions escalated from $100 to $5500 and remained unpaid, the Court of Appeals issued an order, now referred to as a Mack Bar, preventing any further filings from being accepted by the court.
- Andy Martin (Anthony Martin-Tragona), who has been barred since 1983 from filing any legal action in a US federal court without permission. He is banned from seeking indigent status in Florida courts due to his history of filing abusive petitions. Martin is also prohibited from filing lawsuits in New York, unless represented by an attorney or with the court's prior approval.
See also
- Abuse of processAbuse of processAbuse of process is a cause of action in tort arising from one party making a malicious and deliberate misuse or perversion of regularly issued court process not justified by the underlying legal action.It is a common law intentional tort...
- BarratryBarratryBarratry is the name of four legal concepts, three in criminal and civil law, and one in admiralty law.* Barratry, in criminal and civil law, is the act or practice of bringing repeated legal actions solely to harass...
- Franchise fraudFranchise fraudFranchise fraud is defined by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation as a pyramid scheme.- Franchise fraud in U.S. federal law :The FBI website states:...
- Frivolous or vexatiousFrivolous or vexatiousIn the law of several jurisdictions, such as Ireland and New Zealand, frivolous or vexatious, when used to describe an action such as a complaint or a legal proceeding, is a term used to deny its being heard, or to dismiss or strike out any ensuing judicial or non-judicial processes.While the term...
- Legal abuseLegal abuseLegal abuse refers to abuses associated with both civil and criminal legal action. Abuse can originate from nearly any part of the legal system, including frivolous and vexatious litigants, abuses by law enforcement, incompetent, careless or corrupt attorneys and misconduct from the judiciary...
- Malicious prosecutionMalicious prosecutionMalicious prosecution is a common law intentional tort, while like the tort of abuse of process, its elements include intentionally instituting and pursuing a legal action that is brought without probable cause and dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution...
- QuerulantQuerulantA querulant is a person who obsessively feels wronged, particularly about minor causes of action. In particular the term is used for those who repeatedly petition authorities or pursue legal actions based on manifestly unfounded grounds...
- Strategic lawsuit against public participationStrategic lawsuit against public participationA strategic lawsuit against public participation is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition....
("SLAPP") - Isaac Wunder orderIsaac Wunder orderAn Isaac Wunder order is an order issued by an Irish court restricting the ability of a vexatious litigant to institute legal proceedings without leave from that or another court, whether for a specified period of time or indefinitely...
- Scientology and the legal systemScientology and the legal systemThe Church of Scientology has been involved in court disputes in several countries. In some cases, when the Church has initiated the dispute, question has been raised as to its motives. The Church says that its use of the legal system is necessary to protect its intellectual property and its right...
- Pro se legal representation in the United StatesPro se legal representation in the United StatesPro se legal representation means advocating on one's own behalf before a court, rather than being represented by a lawyer. This may occur in any court proceeding, whether one is the defendant or plaintiff in civil cases, and when one is a defendant in criminal cases. Pro se is a Latin phrase...
- Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants