Sullivan v. Banks
- Lewis Liman
- 1:24-cv-03251
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Sullivan v. Banks, Judge Swain extended Sullivan’s amendment deadline, denied counsel, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Mark J. Sullivan, whose deadline to file an amended complaint was extended but whose request for appointed counsel and permission to appeal without paying filing fees were denied. The case remained subject to entry of a civil judgment if he did not file by February 7, 2025.
What happened
In Sullivan v. Banks, the court had previously dismissed Mark J. Sullivan’s case for failure to state a claim and because he named defendants who were immune from suit. The court had allowed him time to file an amended complaint, and Sullivan requested another extension and appointment of counsel.
The court granted Sullivan’s request for more time and set February 7, 2025, as the deadline for filing an amended complaint. It warned that no further extensions would be granted and that failure to file by the deadline would lead to entry of a civil judgment. The court denied Sullivan’s request for appointed counsel and directed him to the Pro Se Law Clinic for possible assistance.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Sullivan permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order did not decide the merits of any amended complaint.
The detailed version
- Sullivan v. Banks · No. 1:24-cv-03251
- Lewis Liman
- Jan. 6, 2025
Background
The court had dismissed Mark J. Sullivan’s action on October 8, 2024, for failure to state a claim and because Sullivan had named defendants who were immune from suit. The court gave him 30 days to file an amended complaint.
Sullivan then requested additional time twice and asked the court to appoint counsel. The court granted the time extensions, denied appointed counsel, and referred Sullivan to the Pro Se Law Clinic. On January 2, 2025, Sullivan filed a third request for more time and a second request for appointed counsel.
Rulings
The court granted Sullivan’s request for additional time to file an amended complaint. It required him to file the amended complaint by February 7, 2025, and stated that no further extensions would be granted. The court warned that if Sullivan did not file by that date, the Clerk of Court would be directed to enter a civil judgment in the action.
The court denied Sullivan’s request for appointment of counsel. It stated that he could seek assistance from the Pro Se Law Clinic and attached information about that clinic.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. As a result, it denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. This order addressed filing time, appointed counsel, and appeal-fee status; it did not decide the merits of any amended complaint.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.