Rose v. Sapienza
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:24-cv-01887
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Rose v. Sapienza, Judge Swain ordered pro se plaintiff Alexis Rose to submit an original signature, denied appeal IFP status, and warned the case would be dismissed for noncompliance.
Alexis Rose, who was ordered to provide an original signature on the amended complaint within 30 days; the action could be dismissed for failure to comply.
What happened
In Rose v. Sapienza, Alexis Rose filed an amended complaint without a signature. The opinion says Rose was representing themself.
The court ordered Rose to resubmit the amended complaint’s signature page with an original signature within 30 days. No summons would issue at that time. If Rose complied, the case would be processed; if not, the action would be dismissed.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The order is dated August 12, 2024.
The detailed version
- Rose v. Sapienza · No. 7:24-cv-01887
- Kenneth Karas
- Aug. 12, 2024
Background
Alexis Rose brought the action without a lawyer and submitted an amended complaint that did not contain a signature. The court cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) and Local Civil Rule 11.1(a), which require an unrepresented party to personally sign a pleading or other court filing. The court explained that the required signature must be handwritten or otherwise physically placed on the document.
Order
The court directed Rose to resubmit the signature page of the amended complaint with an original signature within 30 days of the order. A copy of the signature page was attached. The court directed that no summons issue at that time. If Rose complied, the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If Rose did not comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed.
Appeal ruling
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The opinion does not state that the action was dismissed in this order.
Disposition
The court ordered an original signature, temporarily withheld issuance of a summons, and denied permission to appeal without prepayment of the filing fee. It warned that failure to comply with the signature directive would result in dismissal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.