Rumanek v. Fallon
1:24-cv-01341
D. Del.May 16, 2025Background
- Sandra Rumanek, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against Magistrate Judge Sherry R. Fallon, alleging a conspiracy resulting in unfavorable outcomes in her past litigations spanning over a decade.
- Rumanek initially sued over employment discrimination in 2012; Judge Fallon presided over that matter and entered judgment against Rumanek after a jury verdict.
- Rumanek claims Fallon's prior representation of another defendant in a state case she brought should have disqualified Fallon, suggesting bias and conspiracy in later federal court proceedings.
- The issue of disqualification was previously appealed and the Third Circuit found any error to be harmless.
- Rumanek seeks damages for lost wages and litigation costs from her unsuccessful cases.
- Fallon moved to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Judicial Bias and Conspiracy | Fallon engaged in an ongoing conspiracy with others resulting in unfavorable rulings. | Rumanek’s claims lack factual basis; prior appeal resolved disqualification issue. | No plausible claim of conspiracy; allegations are unsupported. |
| Appropriateness of Disqualification | Fallon should have self-disqualified due to prior representation. | Any error in not disqualifying was harmless per appellate court. | No actionable error; prior appeal is binding. |
| Sufficiency of Complaint | Sufficient facts and legal conclusions establish claim. | Complaint relies on conclusory, unsupported allegations. | Complaint lacks substantive plausibility, dismissed with prejudice. |
| Vexatious Litigation Warning | Not directly addressed. | Prior filings indicate a pattern of groundless litigation. | Rumanek warned against further similar filings, risk of injunction imposed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007) (pro se pleadings must be liberally construed)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleadings)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (facial plausibility standard)
- Johnson v. City of Shelby, 574 U.S. 10 (2014) (imperfect legal theory does not justify dismissal)
- In re Rockefeller Ctr. Props., Inc. Sec. Litig., 311 F.3d 198 (3d Cir. 2002) (court need not credit unsupported legal conclusions)
- Rumanek v. Indep. Sch. Mgmt. Inc., [citation="744 F. App'x 43"] (3d Cir. 2018) (any error in judge’s refusal to recuse was harmless)