Pettus v. Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-07205
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Pettus v. Wolfe: Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Pettus had not obtained required permission to file.
James Pettus’s civil action against Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe and Andrew Barnes was dismissed without prejudice; the court also denied fee-waiver status for an appeal.
What happened
In James Pettus v. Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe; Andrew Barnes, James Pettus filed a new civil action and asked to proceed without paying court fees. The opinion states that he was representing himself.
A 2005 court judgment barred Pettus from filing future civil actions in the Southern District of New York without first obtaining the court’s permission. Pettus did not ask for that permission before filing this action.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Pettus did not comply with the earlier judgment. She also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal after certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Pettus v. Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe · No. 1:25-cv-07205
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 17, 2025
Background
James Pettus filed this civil action against Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe and Andrew Barnes. The opinion states that Pettus was proceeding without a lawyer and sought permission to proceed without paying the ordinary filing fee.
The court had previously entered a February 4, 2005 judgment barring Pettus from filing future civil actions in the Southern District of New York unless he first obtained leave, meaning permission, from the court. The opinion states that Pettus did not seek that permission before filing this action.
Ruling
Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1651 because Pettus failed to comply with the earlier filing restriction. The opinion does not address the underlying claims against the defendants.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Pettus permission to proceed without paying the ordinary appeal-related fees and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.