Arroyo-Bey v. Ward
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-03333
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Arroyo-Bey v. Ward, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice after Arroyo-Bey neither paid filing fees nor properly sought permission to proceed without paying.
The dismissal directly affected Noel Arroyo-Bey and ended this action without prejudice; the defendants were Thomas A. Ward and the City of New York.
What happened
In Arroyo-Bey v. Ward, Noel Arroyo-Bey sued Thomas A. Ward and the City of New York. The court ordered him to pay the $405 filing fee or submit an amended application showing that he could not afford it.
Arroyo-Bey did neither. He sent a letter asserting that he could not pay and arguing that the filing fees were unconstitutional, but he did not provide supporting facts or submit the required amended application. The court stated that the filing-fee challenge was without merit.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. She also denied permission to appeal without paying fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Arroyo-Bey v. Ward · No. 1:25-cv-03333
- Laura Swain
- June 12, 2025
Background
Noel Arroyo-Bey brought this action against Thomas A. Ward and the City of New York. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
By an order dated April 28, 2025, the court directed Arroyo-Bey, within 30 days, either to pay the $405 filing fee required to start a civil action or to complete and submit an amended application to proceed without paying the fee. The amended application had to include facts showing that he was unable to pay. The court warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal.
Compliance and Filing-Fee Challenge
Arroyo-Bey did not pay the filing fee and did not submit the required amended application. Instead, he sent a letter asserting, without supporting facts, that he could not pay and arguing that the filing fees were unconstitutional. The court rejected that challenge, citing Supreme Court precedent upholding the imposition of filing fees.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the appellate fees. The opinion did not decide the merits of Arroyo-Bey’s underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.