Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 7, 2025

Johnson v. Onondaga County DDS-Es Fair Hearings - SP

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-01617
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Johnson v. Onondaga County DSS-ES Fair Hearings - SP, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Johnson lacked required filing permission.

Who this affects

Robert W. Johnson’s action was dismissed without prejudice, and his request to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal was denied.

What happened

Robert W. Johnson filed Johnson v. Onondaga County DSS-ES Fair Hearings - SP without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. An earlier order had barred him from filing future civil actions in that court without first obtaining permission.

Johnson had not obtained that permission before filing this action. The court therefore dismissed the action without prejudice for failing to comply with the earlier order.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Johnson permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Johnson v. Onondaga County DDS-Es Fair Hearings - SP · No. 1:25-cv-01617
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Mar. 7, 2025

Background

Robert W. Johnson filed this civil action without a lawyer and requested permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court treated him as appearing without a lawyer because he signed the complaint in the place designated for an unrepresented party, and the purported attorney who also signed the complaint was not admitted to the bar of the court or to any state bar in the Second Circuit.

In a prior related proceeding, the court had barred Johnson from filing future civil actions in that court without paying the filing fee unless he first obtained the court’s permission. The opinion states that the earlier order was dated July 10, 2020, and identifies that proceeding as No. 1:19-CV-7337. Johnson filed this action and requested permission to proceed without paying the fee, but he did not first request permission to file the action.

Ruling

The court dismissed this action without prejudice because Johnson failed to comply with the earlier filing restriction. It directed the clerk to enter judgment dismissing the action for that reason.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.