Court Tells Important Man His Lawsuit Has No Merit, Just Like It Would Anyone Else

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Saturday dismissed a lawsuit brought by a very important man, finding that it had no merit. This is a thing that courts are allowed to do.

The man in question had sued The Wall Street Journal over a story he said was false. The judge disagreed. She dismissed the case with prejudice, a legal term meaning he cannot bring it again. He had previously been invited to try again. He tried again.

Court watchers described the ruling as routine. A lawsuit is filed. A judge reads it. The judge decides whether it holds up. In this instance, it did not. None of this is new. It has been the arrangement for some time.

“The complaint attempts to manufacture a flaw where none exists,” the judge wrote, in language a thousand other plaintiffs have read about their own cases while sitting in a parked car.

The man had asked for ten billion dollars. He did not receive ten billion dollars. He received a document explaining why.

The dismissal is the second in the matter. An earlier version of the suit, seeking twenty billion dollars, was also thrown out. The judge at that time left the door open. The door has now been closed. It was, by all accounts, an ordinary door.

Legal scholars contacted for this story confirmed that the outcome was, from a procedural standpoint, unremarkable. A party sues. The claim is tested. The claim fails. The scholars seemed unsure why they were being asked.

The man denies the underlying story. The ruling noted that the newspaper had printed his denial at the time, which is generally the thing that makes a denial a denial.

Reached for comment, the man indicated he would appeal, pursue the matter further, and remain extremely confident. These are also things people say in parked cars.

What distinguishes the case from the roughly four hundred thousand civil suits dismissed in this country every year is difficult to identify. The paperwork is the same. The judge is the same kind of judge. The ruling fits in the same folder.

The man is expected to be told no again at a later date, by a different court, in the same calm font.