Juares v. Odyssey House NYC Inc.
- Louis Stanton
- 1:24-cv-06824
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Juares v. Odyssey House NYC Inc.: Judge Swain ordered Alexis Juares to pay $405 or submit an IFP application within 30 days.
Alexis Juares, who must either pay $405 or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees within 30 days to avoid dismissal of the action.
What happened
In Juares v. Odyssey House NYC Inc., Alexis Juares filed a civil action without paying the required fees or submitting an application to proceed without prepaying them.
The court ordered Juares, within 30 days, either to pay $405 in filing and administrative fees or submit a signed application to proceed without prepayment. No summons will issue yet, and the court said the action will be dismissed if Juares does not comply.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Juares v. Odyssey House NYC Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-06824
- Louis Stanton
- Sept. 19, 2024
Background
Alexis Juares brought this civil action without a lawyer. The complaint was submitted without the required filing fees and without an application to proceed without prepaying those fees.
Order
The court explained that proceeding with a civil action requires either payment of $405—consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $55 administrative fee—or a signed application to proceed without prepayment of fees, commonly called an IFP application. The court ordered Juares to take one of those steps within 30 days of the order. If the application is granted, Juares may proceed without prepaying the fees.
No summons will issue at this time. If Juares complies, the case will be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If Juares does not comply within the allowed period, the action will be dismissed.
Appeal and disposition
The court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order addressed filing fees and access to the court; it did not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.