Preacely v. The City of New York/NYPD/NYCHA

Background

The court had previously dismissed Plaintiff’s pro se lawsuit as frivolous and for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. Because of Plaintiff’s litigation history, that earlier order gave him 30 days to show cause—meaning explain why the court should not restrict his ability to file future civil cases without paying filing fees.

Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal and a letter. The court treated the letter as a request for relief under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and denied that request. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit later dismissed Plaintiff’s appeal as frivolous. The Second Circuit also required Plaintiff to explain why it should not impose a filing restriction, but after he failed to submit the required explanation, it directed its clerk to reject future appeals or other proceedings from Plaintiff unless he first obtained permission to file.

Ruling

Plaintiff also failed to respond to the district court’s order to show cause. The court therefore barred him from filing any future civil litigation in the Southern District of New York without paying the filing fee unless he first obtains the court’s leave to file. Any request for permission must be titled “Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to File,” include the proposed complaint and a copy of this order, and be filed with the court’s Pro Se Intake Unit. The court stated that an action filed without first seeking permission would be dismissed for failure to comply with the order.

Judge Colleen McMahon warned that continued submission of frivolous documents could lead to additional sanctions, including monetary penalties. She certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Plaintiff permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal. The clerk was directed to mail Plaintiff a copy of the order and record service on the docket.