Daddy's House Records, Inc. v. Bad Boy Entertainment Holding, Inc.
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-08102
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Daddy’s House Records v. Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Johnson could not represent the corporation and violated a prior filing restriction.
Daddy’s House Records, Inc., Robert W. Johnson, and the defendants in this action.
What happened
Daddy’s House Records, Inc. sued Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, Inc., and others. Robert W. Johnson filed the case for Daddy’s House and requested permission to proceed without paying court fees based on his own financial situation.
The court found that Johnson did not provide enough information to show he was a lawyer and appeared to be representing himself. Because a person who is not a lawyer cannot represent a corporation, the court dismissed the claims he brought for Daddy’s House. The court also found that he had not followed an earlier order requiring him to get permission before filing a new civil case without paying fees.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action without prejudice on both grounds. She also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, and directed the clerk to enter judgment dismissing the action.
The detailed version
- Daddy's House Records, Inc. v. Bad Boy Entertainment Holding, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-08102
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 10, 2025
Background
Robert W. Johnson brought the action on behalf of Daddy’s House Records, Inc. He signed the complaint in a way that appeared to indicate he was an attorney and used “Esq.” with his name, along with a bar number. The court stated that no attorney named Robert W. Johnson with that bar number was admitted to the court or to the bars of the states in the Second Circuit. Johnson also filed an application to proceed without paying court fees that appeared to describe his own financial situation rather than the corporation’s.
Representation of the Corporation
The court found that Johnson had not provided enough information to show that he was an attorney and appeared to be a person representing himself. A person representing himself cannot assert claims on behalf of a corporation. The court therefore dismissed without prejudice any claims Johnson asserted on behalf of Daddy’s House. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal did not itself bar refiling those claims, although the opinion does not describe any future filing’s possible requirements.
Prior Filing Restriction
The court also relied on an earlier order dated July 10, 2020, which barred Johnson from filing future civil actions in that court without paying fees unless he first obtained permission from the court. Johnson filed this new action without paying fees and had not sought that required permission. The court additionally dismissed without prejudice this action because Johnson failed to comply with that earlier order.
Disposition
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. It directed the clerk to enter a judgment dismissing the action for the reasons stated in the order. The opinion does not reach the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.