DeANDRE L. KENDRICK v. CNN INC. and CNN CORPORATION

• Court: District Court, N.D. Indiana
• Decided: December 1, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-00513
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION

DeANDRE L. KENDRICK,

Plaintiff,

v. CAUSE NO. 2:25-CV-513-PPS-APR

CNN INC. and CNN CORPORATION,

Defendants.

OPINION AND ORDER DeAndre L. Kendrick, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a factually frivolous complaint. ECF 1. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, I must review the merits of a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. I am required to give the allegations in the complaint a liberal construction. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quotation marks and citations omitted). But even so, a court may dismiss a claim as factually frivolous “if the facts alleged are clearly baseless,” which includes allegations that are “fanciful” or “fantastic.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32–33 (1992) (quotation marks and citations omitted). Here, Kendrick alleges that he was the subject of a news report that was broadcast on CNN, but the details of that alleged story are not credible. The factual allegations in Kendrick’s complaint are as follows: On approximately February 14, 2025, CNN News Corporation broadcasted on international news that the pro se Plaintiff De’Andre L. Kendrick (D.O.C. # 167253) was a certified macaroni withholding Big Bacon, clarified by National Human Resource as Gsnap. CNN News Corporation went as far as to say pro se Plaintiff De’Andre L. Kendrick (D.O.C. # 167253) also known as King Zay Zay and Pharoah the Godd, is a Lover-Boi and genuine compassionate lover. These words and discussion were being held by individuals such as Nancy Grace, Maxine Waters, Abby Philips, Anderson Cooper, and Corey Booker.

ECF 1 at 2 (cleaned up for clarity). He alleges these statements violated his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights and caused him distress and mental anguish. Typically, a court must assume the facts of a complaint are true. However, courts have “[t]he unusual power [for cases filed in forma pauperis] to pierce the veil of the complaint's factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989). “[A] finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate 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.” Denton, 504 U.S. at 32–33. A case can be dismissed without a response from the defendants where “the facts alleged in the complaint are . . . unbelievable, even though there has been no evidentiary hearing to determine their truth or falsity.” Gladney v. Pendleton Correctional Facility, 302 F.3d 773, 774 (7th Cir. 2002); see also Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025 (7th Cir. 2000). I find it unbelievable that Kendrick was the subject of a CNN news story in which he was called a “Lover-Boi” and labeled a genuine compassionate lover. This complaint is based on allegations that are not credible and will be dismissed

as factually frivolous. “The usual standard in civil cases is to allow defective pleadings to be corrected, especially in early stages, at least where amendment would not be futile.” Abu-Shawish v. United States, 898 F.3d 726, 738 (7th Cir. 2018). “District courts, however, have broad discretion to deny leave to amend a complaint where the amendment would be futile.” Russell v. Zimmer, Inc., 82 F.4th 564, 572 (7th Cir. 2023). For the reasons previously explained, such is the case here.

For these reasons, this case is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

ENTERED: December 1, 2025. /s/ Philip P. Simon PHILIP P. SIMON, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT