Fitzpatrick v. Bowery Residence Corporation
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-04168
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Fitzpatrick v. Bowery Residence Corporation, Judge Swain ordered payment or an amended fee-waiver application within 30 days.
William Fitzpatrick and the pending action against Bowery Residence Corporation and the other named defendants; the order requires Fitzpatrick to pay the fees or submit an amended IFP application before the case proceeds.
What happened
In Fitzpatrick v. Bowery Residence Corporation, William Fitzpatrick, representing himself, filed a complaint without paying the required fees or submitting a proper application to proceed without prepaying them.
The court gave Fitzpatrick 30 days to pay $405 or submit the attached amended application. No summons will issue yet, and the case will be processed if he complies.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain said that failing to comply will result in dismissal without prejudice. She also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from this order, ruling that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Fitzpatrick v. Bowery Residence Corporation · No. 1:25-cv-04168
- Laura Swain
- May 21, 2025
Background
William Fitzpatrick brought this civil action without a lawyer. He submitted the complaint without paying the required $405 in fees and without submitting a proper application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning without prepaying the filing fees.
Order
The court ordered Fitzpatrick, within 30 days of the order, to do one of two things: pay the $405 filing and administrative fees, or submit the attached amended IFP application. If the court grants the amended application, Fitzpatrick may proceed without prepaying the fees. The application must identify docket number 25-CV-4168 (LTS).
No summons will issue at this time. If Fitzpatrick complies, the Clerk’s Office will process the case under its usual procedures. If he does not comply within the allowed time, the action will be dismissed without prejudice.
Appeal
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. This order did not decide the underlying claims in the complaint.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.