Lacey v. Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Management
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-09294
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Lacey v. Merrill Lynch, Judge Swain dismissed the case without prejudice because Lacey failed to update his address as ordered.
John Jay Lacey, the self-represented plaintiff, may file a new civil action but cannot appeal this order without paying the filing fees.
What happened
In Lacey v. Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Management, the court had ordered John Jay Lacey to keep his address and electronic contact information current because he was representing himself.
After Lacey did not update his address or communicate with the court, the court dismissed the action under Rule 41(b) for failing to follow that order. The court stated that Lacey could file a new civil action.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the clerk to enter judgment. She also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Lacey permission to appeal without paying the filing fees.
The detailed version
- Lacey v. Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Management · No. 1:24-cv-09294
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 22, 2025
Background
John Jay Lacey was representing himself in this action. A March 18, 2024 standing order required self-represented litigants to inform the court whenever their address or electronic contact information changed.
By an order dated February 25, 2025, the court directed Lacey to explain within 30 days why the action should not be dismissed without prejudice because he had not updated his address. Lacey did not update his address or otherwise communicate with the court.
Ruling
The court dismissed the action under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failing to comply with the March 18, 2024 standing order. The dismissal was without prejudice to Lacey filing a new civil action.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fees. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment dismissing the case.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court dismissed the action for failure to comply with a court order and did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.