Leonard of the Family Mills v. Stack
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-06457
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Leonard of the Family Mills v. Stack, Judge Swain ordered a signature declaration within 30 days; noncompliance will lead to dismissal without prejudice.
The plaintiff, Leonard of the Family Mills, must submit the signature declaration within 30 days to avoid dismissal without prejudice; no summons will issue meanwhile.
What happened
In Leonard of the Family Mills v. Stack, the plaintiff filed the complaint without a signature and is representing himself. The court ordered the plaintiff to provide a declaration about his signature within 30 days.
The court also said that no summons will issue for now. If the plaintiff does not comply on time, the action will be dismissed without prejudice, meaning the order does not bar refiling. The court also denied the plaintiff’s request to proceed without paying appeal fees.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain issued the order on January 6, 2025. She relied on federal and local rules requiring an unrepresented party to personally sign a pleading or other court filing.
The detailed version
- Leonard of the Family Mills v. Stack · No. 1:24-cv-06457
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 6, 2025
Background
The plaintiff brought the action without a lawyer and submitted a complaint that did not contain a signature.
Court’s analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) and Local Civil Rule 11.1(a) require an unrepresented party to sign a pleading, written motion, or other court paper personally. The court explained that this requirement calls for a handwritten name or a mark placed by hand.
Orders
The court directed the plaintiff to submit, within 30 days of the order, a declaration regarding his signature. A declaration form for the signature page was attached to the order. No summons will issue at this time. The court stated that if the plaintiff does not comply within the allowed period, the action will be dismissed without prejudice.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied in forma pauperis status for purposes of an appeal, meaning the plaintiff may not proceed without paying the required appeal fees under that provision.
Effect of the order
This order addresses the complaint’s missing signature and related filing requirements. It does not decide the underlying claims against Eileen Stack or Region 2 IV-D Agency.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.