Cox v. The Internet: Thrown Out in Florida District Court

Crystal Cox and her looney rantings continue to be thrown out of federal district courts. Now Florida has dismissed Crystal L. Cox’s complaint with some choice words about her conspiracy theories and other nonsense.

The “case” is summarized:

Plaintiff’s 200 page Complaint essentially alleges that all persons and entities that were part of her prior Ninth Circuit legal proceeding, or reported thereon, have conspired to defame and interfere with her First Amendment Rights. The Plaintiff also alleges individual malpractice, conspiracy, and defamation claims against her former attorney , as well as anti-trust and anti-competition claims against Forbes and the New York Times. [D . E . 1].

On Crystal Cox’s case being frivolous and baseless:

A complaint is frivolous when the factual allegations are ï’clearly baseless” or the legal theories are
”indisputably meritless.” Carroll v . Gross , 984 F .2d 392, 393 (11th Cir. 1993). “Fantastic” or “delusional” claims are examples of clearly baseless allegations . Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992) (finding that when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible, whether or not there are judicially noticeable facts available to contradict them, then a finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate).

The current claim is clearly baseless in light of the fact that the Complaint is comprised of conclusory allegations that are oft-times fantastic or delusional, and substantiated by no facts to support the practicality of the claims. For instance, Plaintiff states that Defendant Randazza and his co-conspirators are involved in prostitution rings, client shakedowns, controlling judges, strong arming or paying off media, and extreme retaliation against those who criticize Defendant Randazza. (D.E. l-2 at p. 94). Plaintiff factually substantiates none of these claims. Plaintiff also conclusively alleges without substantiation that Defendant Judge Gloria Navarro
placed Plaintiff’s life in danger. Id. at p. 25.

And even if the judge let the case proceed, Cox’s claims would be dismissed quickly:

Further, an affirmative defense will effectively dismiss the action against many of the Defendants .

Indeed, it is unlikely that Cox will take this as a sign that her actions are wrong. No, Crystal Cox couldn’t possibly be delusional and legally incorrect. Rather, the judges are all part of a massive conspiracy to destroy her life!

Wake up, sister. You’re nuts and the courts will continue to toss out your claims. If I were you, I’d make friends with Salty Droid and follow his advice about using your “reputation management services” to help someone who is truly deserving.

Leave a Reply