Dekoven v. Bell

• Decision Date: 26 April 2001
• Docket Number: No. 01-10124-BC.,01-10124-BC.
• Citation: 140 F.Supp.2d 748
• Parties: Chad Gabriel DEKOVEN, a/k/a "Messiah-God" # 145274, Plaintiff, v. Art BELL, Mike Seigel, Whitley Streiber, Ian Punnett, Premier Radio Network, Supreme Council Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite of Free Masonry, Simon and Schuster, United States of America, Great Britain, U.K., Northern Ireland, State of Michigan, Aish Ha Torah, and Nation State of Israel, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan

140 F.Supp.2d 748

Chad Gabriel DEKOVEN, a/k/a "Messiah-God" # 145274, Plaintiff, v. Art BELL, Mike Seigel, Whitley Streiber, Ian Punnett, Premier Radio Network, Supreme Council Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite of Free Masonry, Simon and Schuster, United States of America, Great Britain, U.K., Northern Ireland, State of Michigan, Aish Ha Torah, and Nation State of Israel, Defendants.

No. 01-10124-BC.

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division.

April 26, 2001.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Chad Gabriel Dekoven, Grand Rapids, MI, pro se.

OPINION AND ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT¹

LAWSON, District Judge.

Before the Court is plaintiff's complaint seeking relief from a variety of governmental and non-governmental entities² for wrongs committed against the plaintiff, Chad Gabriel DeKoven, a/k/a Messiah-God # 145274,³ due to the failure of these defendants to acknowledge, accept and act on plaintiff's claim that he is the "God-Messiah" of the Holy Bible.⁴ The plaintiff is presently a prisoner at the Standish Maximum Correctional Facility in Standish, Michigan. He has paid the entire filing fee of $150, rendering inapplicable the authority to screen such complaints for frivolity or maliciousness under a portion of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). However, the Court has an initial and continuing obligation under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) to review and dismiss cases in which the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Because the Court finds that the complaint is patently frivolous, implausible, unsubstantial and devoid of merit, the Court determines that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this "controversy" and will, therefore, dismiss the complaint sua sponte.

I.

The plaintiff's 125 page complaint, accompanied by over eighty pages of exhibits, contains several statements and allegations of fact of varying degrees of plausibility. Some of plaintiff's allegations are about events he claims to have experienced or observed in prison. Some of these allegations set forth arguable claims of violations of someone's constitutional rights. For example, plaintiff alleges that he witnessed the murder by unnamed white male guards of an unnamed black male prisoner who refused to undress in front of female guards. Complaint at 80. Plaintiff also alleges that unnamed prison authorities have refused to allow him to "use his Holy Name, `Dakota Belzadok' on any outgoing or incoming mail, even if he puts his incarcerated name along with it." Complaint at 81. Plaintiff alleges that he has been attacked and stabbed by other inmates and issued false major misconduct tickets afterwards by unnamed prison officials. Complaint at 81. Plaintiff alleges that unnamed prison authorities were deliberately indifferent to his need for medical care for a serious ankle injury which occurred during a volleyball game, Complaint at 86, and various broken bones he has suffered in his hands. Complaint at 86-89. However, none of the named defendants in this action are employees of the Michigan Department of Corrections ("MDOC").

Several other allegations are more general, such as plaintiff's contention that: "The Plaintiff is the `God-Messiah' of the Holy Bible (hereafter HB), Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, 11: 1-7; Ezekiel 37:22, Ezekiel 43: 7-9, Ezekiel 44:3, Daniel 12:13, Hosea 3:5, Zechariah 3: 8-9, [and] Revelation 10:2, 19:16, 22:12 & 20." Complaint at 24.

The complaint states that the following three questions are presented for the Court's decision:

I. ARE THE COUNTRIES OF ISRAEL, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, & GREAT BRITAIN FOUNDED UPON THE HOLY BIBLE?

II. IF THE UNITED STATES, ISRAEL, AND GREAT BRITAIN WERE FOUNDED UPON THE HOLY BIBLE, CAN ANY CITIZEN OR JUDGE OR CONGRESS OR LEGISLATIVE BODY, OR ANY HUMAN, MAKE ANY RULE OR LAW THAT GOES AGAINST WHAT THAT HOLY BIBLE SAYS IS "GOD'S" LAW WHICH HAS NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED TO BE MADE BY "GOD" OR "THE MESSIAH"?

III. IF THE PLAINTIFF CAN PROVE BY SCIENTIFIC METHODS THAT HE IS THE "MESSIAH", "THE ANOINTED ONE", THE "ALPHA & OMEGA", "GOD IN THE FLESH", THAT THE HOLY BIBLE SAYS WAS TO COME, THEN CAN ANY COURT IN THE UNITED STATES OR GREAT BRITAIN, OR ISRAEL REFUSE TO GRANT THE PLAINTIFF THE RELIEF HE REQUESTS IN THIS PETITION/COMPLAINT?

Complaint at 4 (bold print in original).

The plaintiff's "causes of action," summarized on pages 118 and 119 of the complaint, sound both in tort and contract. The list of torts is fashioned after the "humans law system" to which, it is alleged, "the Plaintiff is not bound to adhere," and includes various claims of negligent, gross negligent and intentional conduct such as larceny, fraud, misrepresentation, and false imprisonment. The contract action is based upon the premise that "Plaintiff is `GOD MESSIAH', whom humans made a covenant with (a contract), Plaintiff has fulfilled all his part of that covenant, humans have not." Complaint at 118.

The complaint requests many forms of relief, which are consistent with plaintiff's view of his place and status in this world. Plaintiff's requests, which are presumably directed to the governmental defendants, include, but are not limited to 1) public acknowledgment by the State of Israel that plaintiff is the King of the Jews; 2) release from prison of the killers of Yitzak Rabin; 3) plaintiff's immediate release from prison, or in the alternative, a declaration by the State of Israel that plaintiff is a political prisoner; 4) treatment of the Red Heifer, Melody, as Royalty; 5) a public declaration that plaintiff is also Allah and, at his insistence, an immediate establishment of a state of peace and disarmament in the Middle East; 6) a declaration of safe passage and sanctuary for Osama Bin Ladin; 7) a declaration from the United States government that plaintiff's claim that he is the Messiah-God is true; 8) issuance of a full pardon for plaintiff; 9) a declaration that the founding fathers of America violated the Ten Commandments when they wrote the United States Constitution and that, consequently, the Constitution and any powers established thereunder have no legal authority over plaintiff, and 10) return to the United States of all U.S. military personnel and as much of their equipment as possible within ninety days.

In the alternative, plaintiff requests that the United States government give plaintiff various material things, including 600 million metric tons of .995 fine gold; 25 billion metric tons of refined steel; 50 million metric tons of refined copper; 250 million metric tons of refined silver; and various animals, including 500 pairs each of mature breeding lake trout, northern pike, small mouth and large mouth bass, perch, coho, brown trout, speckled trout, blue catfish, channel catfish, sturgeon, rock bass, bluegill, sunfish, and salmon; 5 million breeding pairs of bison; 500 million mature breeding pairs of each species of crab and mollusk that inhabit the waters in the borders of the United States; and 45 million trees of various varieties at least the age of 50 years old.⁵

From the State of Michigan plaintiff seeks 1) issuance of a full pardon for plaintiff, or in the alternative, immediate issuance of a parole, the full duration of which is to be 60 seconds, 2) transfer of all wheelchair bound prisoners from the Standish Maximum Facility to the Jackson prison complex where they may obtain better care, and other relief set forth on pages 123-24 of the complaint. Alternatively, if plaintiff is not granted a pardon or a sixty-second parole by the State of Michigan, he seeks 50 million metric tons of salt from the Detroit salt mines, 50 million metric tons of copper from Michigan's copper mines, and 25,000 mature breeding pairs of every creature that exists in the State of Michigan, and other items. Complaint at 124. Plaintiff's requests for relief from the other defendants in this lawsuit are found at pages 124 25 of the complaint.

II.

A pro se litigant's complaint is to be construed liberally. Middleton v. McGinnis, 860 F.Supp. 391, 392 (E.D.Mich.1994)(citing Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976)). Further, because access to the courts is essential to the enforcement of laws and protection of the values that are rooted deeply in our democratic form of government, this Court may not treat lightly the claims of any litigant, even those whose contentions appear fantastic and baseless on their face. Each complaint is entitled to a thorough review to determine whether it has merit and states a federally cognizable claim. The cost of this sound judicial policy, measured in the expenditure of judicial resources, is one that is well worth the benefit of open access to the judicial process.

However, because judicial resources are not limitless, Congress has enacted the Prison Litigation Reform Act and thereby directed courts to examine certain complaints filed by prisoners in order to make a preliminary assessment of the merits before permitting the full engagement of the adversary process. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A. Thus, the Court may dismiss an indigent prisoner's civil rights complaint at any time if the action is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). A complaint is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989). "A complaint lacks an arguable basis in law or fact if it contains factual allegations that are `fantastic or delusional' or if it is based on legal theories that are indisputably meritless." Brown v. Bargery, 207 F.3d 863, 866 (6th Cir.2000)(citing Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327-28, 109 S.Ct. 1827). See also Lawler v. Marshall, 898 F.2d 1196, 1198-99 (6th Cir. 1990)(a complaint lacks an arguable basis in fact when its...