Baseball Crank points to an opinion from the Fourth District Court of Appeals [link goes to PDF file] which dismisses, en masse, several suits like this:
TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION; MARY SURRALT; SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR, Defendants – Appellees.
TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States; U.S. CONGRESS; U.S. SENATE; THE COUNTRY OF IRAN; ALL NEWS MEDIA OF THIS NATION, U.S.A., Defendants – Appellees.
TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. JIM CROW; NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, Defendants – Appellees.
Also being sued by Mr Hurt: “Clinton” (unspecified) and the Falun Gong. Said the court:
Tyrone Hurt appeals the district court’s orders dismissing these actions as frivolous or for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the records and find that the appeals are frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for the reasons stated by the district court.
Mr Hurt is apparently well-known in judicial circles: in October, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia barred him from filing pro se appeals in forma pauperis and dismissed the 44 such he’d already filed. The court summed up Hurt’s suits this way:
An extraordinary number of people, institutions, and inanimate objects have wronged Tyrone Hurt. In just the last couple of years, Hurt has sued the Declaration of Independence, Black’s Law Dictionary, the United Nations, agencies of the District of Columbia and the Federal Government, and various courts and their officers… Nor are the slights Hurt suffered mere glancing blows; he routinely demands trillions of dollars in damages.
None of this should be construed as an argument that pro se litigants with IFP status should be barred from the judicial system. But there ought to be some way to exclude obvious dimwits from the proceedings, at least until such time as said dimwits are nominated to a Cabinet post.