Latouche v. Bodge
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-06239
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Latouche v. Bodge, Judge Swain kept the closed case closed and ordered the amended complaint and fee forms filed in a new case.
Valery Latouche's closed case remains closed, while his amended complaint and related fee forms are to be filed in a new action. Lieutenant Brian J. Bodge and Mrs. Elaine Velez were not subject to a ruling on the underlying claims in this order.
What happened
In Latouche v. Bodge, Valery Latouche filed a complaint against Lieutenant Brian J. Bodge and Mrs. Elaine Velez. The court had dismissed the case without prejudice after Latouche did not submit required forms or pay the filing fee.
Latouche later submitted an amended complaint, an application to proceed without paying the filing fee, and a prisoner authorization form in the already-closed case. The court said he had not shown a basis for reopening it, but directed the Clerk to file those materials as a new case.
Judge Swain ordered that this case remain closed and denied fee-free status for any appeal because the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide the claims against Bodge or Velez.
The detailed version
- Latouche v. Bodge · No. 1:24-cv-06239
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 3, 2025
Background
Valery Latouche filed a complaint asserting claims against Lieutenant Brian J. Bodge and Mrs. Elaine Velez. The court received the complaint on August 8, 2024. Latouche did not submit an application to proceed without paying the filing fee, known as an in forma pauperis application, or a required prisoner authorization form. The court directed him to submit those forms or prepay the filing fees. When the court received neither the forms nor payment, it entered a judgment dismissing the action without prejudice on October 3, 2024.
After the dismissal, Latouche sent status letters to the court. On January 13, 2025, he filed an amended complaint, an application to proceed without paying the filing fee, and a prisoner authorization form in this closed action.
Court’s reasoning
The court held that the action was closed and that Latouche had not shown a basis for reopening it to accept an amended complaint. Because the prior dismissal was without prejudice to refiling, the court stated that nothing prevented Latouche from bringing a new action.
Disposition
The court directed the Clerk of Court to open a new action and file the amended complaint there. It also directed the Clerk to refile the application to proceed without paying the filing fee and the prisoner authorization form in the new action. The court ordered that this action remain closed.
The court separately certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not resolve the underlying claims against Bodge or Velez.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.