Nwosu v. Accor Management US Inc.
- James Oetken
- 1:24-cv-07649
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Nwosu v. Accor Management, Judge Oetken denied Nwosu’s request to proceed without paying fees, including for her appeal.
Plaintiff Nwosu’s request to proceed without paying court fees and her effort to obtain that status for an appeal were affected. The opinion does not state any separate effect on the defendants.
What happened
In Nwosu v. Accor Management US Inc., Plaintiff Nwosu asked to proceed without paying court fees. The request concerned her appeal of an order transferring the case to the District of Columbia.
Nwosu had paid the filing fee after submitting her application, so the Court had not ruled on it at first. When the Court later reviewed the application, it found that she had provided no financial information and had written “N/A” across the form.
J. Paul Oetken denied Nwosu’s application. He also certified that an appeal from the Court’s earlier orders would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for that appeal.
The detailed version
- Nwosu v. Accor Management US Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-07649
- James Oetken
- Jan. 10, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Nwosu appealed this Court’s order transferring the case to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The Court was notified that the appeal could not proceed until it ruled on Nwosu’s application to proceed without paying court fees. This status is commonly called proceeding without paying fees because of inability to pay.
Application
Nwosu filed the application on October 4, 2024. On October 11, 2024, she paid the filing fee, so the Court did not rule on the application at that time. After reviewing it, the Court found that Nwosu had provided inadequate information to show that she could not pay the costs of the proceedings. The application contained no information about her financial situation and instead stated “N/A” across the form.
Ruling
The Court denied Nwosu’s application to proceed without paying fees. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the Court’s orders at ECF Nos. 10 and 14 would not be taken in good faith. On that basis, J. Paul Oetken denied fee-waiver status for purposes of the appeal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.