Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 16, 2025

Carroll v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:25-cv-04979
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Carroll v. Equifax, Judge Swain denied Carroll’s alternative fee tender and ordered payment or a corrected fee-waiver application.

Who this affects

Estelle Kevett Carroll must either pay the $405 filing fees or submit an amended application establishing that she cannot pay. The case will be dismissed if she does not comply within 30 days.

What happened

In Carroll v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC, Estelle Kevett Carroll filed the case without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fees. The court found that her application did not provide enough information to show that she could not pay.

Carroll also asked the court to accept collateral connected to a financial instrument instead of the required fees. The court denied that request and required her to either pay $405 or submit a corrected application explaining how she pays her living expenses and otherwise showing that she cannot afford the fees.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain gave Carroll 30 days to comply. No summons will issue yet, and the case will be dismissed if she does not comply. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Carroll v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC · No. 1:25-cv-04979
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
June 16, 2025

Background

Estelle Kevett Carroll brought this action without a lawyer. To proceed in the district court, she had to either pay $405 in filing and administrative fees or submit an application to proceed without prepaying those fees. Carroll submitted an application and supporting documents.

The court found that the application did not establish that Carroll was unable to pay. The opinion states that Carroll reported that she was not currently employed, had no income, money, or assets, and answered “0” to questions about how she paid her expenses and how many dependents she had. The court concluded that she had not fully answered the application or explained how she paid her living expenses.

Rulings and required next step

Carroll alternatively asked the court to recognize “an equivalent tender” using collateral pledged through a financial instrument. The court denied that motion. It ordered Carroll, within 30 days of the order, to either pay the $405 in fees or submit an amended application to proceed without prepaying fees. The amended application must use docket number 25-CV-4979 (LTS) and provide facts showing that she cannot pay. If the court grants the amended application, Carroll may proceed without prepaying the fees.

The court directed that no summons issue at this time. It stated that the case would be processed through the Clerk’s Office if Carroll complied, but that the action would be dismissed if she did not comply within the allowed time. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

Classification

This is a procedural order because it addresses filing fees and an application to proceed without prepayment, not the merits of Carroll’s claims against Equifax.

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.