Buxbaum v. Payward, Inc.
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-00361
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Buxbaum v. Payward, Inc., Judge Swain ordered Michael Buxbaum to pay fees or submit an IFP application within 30 days.
Michael Buxbaum must either pay $405 or submit a signed IFP application within 30 days; Payward, Inc. is the defendant in the action. The action may be dismissed if Buxbaum does not comply.
What happened
Buxbaum v. Payward, Inc. was brought by Michael Buxbaum without a lawyer against Payward, Inc., doing business as Kraken. He filed the complaint without paying the required fees or submitting an application to proceed without prepaying them.
The court ordered Buxbaum, within 30 days, either to pay $405 in filing and administrative fees or to submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees. The court said no summons would issue at that time and warned that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Buxbaum v. Payward, Inc. · No. 1:25-cv-00361
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 17, 2025
Background
Michael Buxbaum brought this action pro se, meaning without a lawyer, against Payward, Inc., doing business as Kraken. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims. Buxbaum submitted the complaint without paying the required fees and without an application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.
Order
The court explained that filing a civil action required either payment of $405—consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $55 administrative fee—or submission of a signed IFP application. The court ordered Buxbaum to do one of those two things within 30 days of the order. If he submitted the application and the court granted it, he would be allowed to proceed without prepaying the fees.
The court directed that no summons issue at that time. It stated that, if Buxbaum complied, the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. It further stated that the action would be dismissed if he failed to comply within the allowed time.
Appeal
The court certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the merits of the underlying action.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.