Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing delusional claims as frivolous
• finding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing plaintiff’s claim of electromagnetic torture by government and prison officials as frivolous
• affirming dismissal of complaint as “delusional and unsupported by any factual basis” where Plaintiff alleged “torture and malicious cruelty by the government and prison officials, specifically, torture by digital electromagnetic waves and other clandestine methods”
• “Mr. McGinnis’ claims of electromagnetic torture [by government and prison officials] are delusional and unsupported by any factual basis. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing these claims as frivolous.”
• “Mr. McGinnis’ claims of electromagnetic torture [by government and prison officials] are delusional and unsupported by any factual basis. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing these claims as frivolous.”
• “Mr. McGinnis’ claims of electromagnetic torture [by government and prison officials] are delusional and unsupported by any factual basis. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing these claims as frivolous.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).