Jones v. Kent County Superior Court

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

MATTHEW JONES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) C.A. No.: K25C-03-047 RLG
)
KENT COUNTY SUPERIIOR )
COURT, )
)
Defendants. )

ORDER

Submitted: March 19, 2025
Decided: May 16, 2025

Upon consideration of the Complaint and Application to Proceed in forma

pauperis of Plaintiff Matthew Jones, the Court finds as follows:

After review of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds Mr.

Matthews qualifies as indigent and approves the motion. As required by 10 Del. C.

§ 8803(b), the Court reviewed the accompanying Complaint. In his Complaint, Mr.

Jones alleges he suffered personal injuries inflicted upon him by Kent County

Superior Court employees. Mr. Jones previously filed similar complaints against the

1
Delaware State Police1 and against Sussex County Superior Court.2 The Court has

reviewed Mr. Jones’s Complaint, and finds it to be both legally and factually

frivolous.

If the Court determines a complaint to be legally frivolous, factually frivolous,

or malicious, the complaint must be dismissed.3

A claim is factually frivolous where the factual allegations
are “baseless, of little or no weight, value or importance,
[or] not worthy of serious attention or trivial.” A claim is
legally frivolous where it is “based on an indisputably
meritless legal theory.” A claim is malicious when
“designed to vex, injure or harass, or one which is
otherwise abusive of the judicial process or which
realleges pending or previously litigated claims.”4

Mr. Jones alleges that, upon entering the courthouse, court employees attacked him

with “anal rapes and gunshots.”5 He asserts these attacks happened “while [Mr.

Jones] was actively serving as an U.S.A. Constituent [sic], like Ben Franklin is, on

the $100 U.S.A. currency [sic].”6 He further contends he suffered “gun shot wounds,

1
Jones v. Delaware State Police, 2019 WL 6170847, at *1 (Del. Super. Nov. 19, 2019).
2
Case ID No. S25C-03-019 MHC.
3
Jones, 2019 WL 6170847, at *1 (citing 10 Del. C. S 8803(b)).
4
Id. (citing 10 Del. C. § 8801(4), (7), and (8)).
5
Compl. at 5.
6
Id.

2
stabbings, Police Brown race H diseases [sic], bludgeonings with batons and clubs,

fists punches and feet kicks, wrenching and twisting, grinding and squeezing,

poisoning, anal rapes, burning, [and] falling.”7 Mr. Jones also suggests an

unidentified injury caused by “the learned noises that they memorized to use as fatal

weapons.”8 Lastly, Mr. Jones posits that “medicine used to raise the dead is

chemically made out of trees that are at least two hundred fifty years old and the

plants that only grow around them [sic].”9

“Mr. Jones’s allegations are so incredible and so patently baseless that the

Court is persuaded that they are factually frivolous.”10 The Court cannot discern any

cognizable legal claims from Mr. Jones’s Complaint. Given Mr. Jones’s apparent

pattern of filing similar complaints, it appears Mr. Jones’s filings “are abusive of the

judicial process.”11

Under 10 Del. C. § 8803(e), this Court may enjoin a litigant from filing future

claims absent leave of the Court. A litigant so enjoined must attach an affidavit to

any future claims certifying that:

7
Id.
8
Id.
9
Id. at 4.
10
Jones, 2019 WL 6170847, at *2.
11
Id.

3
(1) the claims sought to be litigated have never been raised
or disposed of before in any court; (2) the facts alleged are
true and correct; (3) the affiant has made a diligent and
good faith effort to determine what relevant case law
controls the legal issues raised; (4) the affiant has no
reason to believe the claims are foreclosed by controlling
law; and (5) the affiant understands that the affidavit is
made under penalty of perjury.12

The Court finds the instant Complaint constitutes an abuse of the judicial

process, and requires that Mr. Jones be enjoined from future filings under § 8803(e).

Mr. Jones has been enjoined under § 8803(e) previously, and failed to comply with

those requirements.13 To the extent Mr. Jones seeks to submit any future filings with

the Court, he must comply with the enumerated requirements of § 8803(e) noted

above. Mr. Jones’s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice, and service of

process shall not issue.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

RLG/ds

OC: Prothonotary
CC: Matthew Jones
12
10 Del. C. § 8803(e).
13
Jones, 2019 WL 6170847, at *2-3.

4