DeJesus-Vazquez v. Bethencourt
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-10587
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In DeJesus-Vazquez v. Bethencourt, Judge McMahon reclassified a filing, closed this action, and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
Egberto DeJesus-Vazquez, Ramon Bethencourt, Jr., the other defendants, and the related court dockets.
What happened
In DeJesus-Vazquez v. Bethencourt, the court determined that a document labeled a “Memorandum of Law” should not have opened a new civil case. It should have been filed in an earlier related action as the plaintiff’s response opposing the defendants’ request to dismiss.
The court ordered the Clerk to docket the new case’s complaint as that opposition memorandum in the earlier action. It also ordered the Clerk to end all pending matters and administratively close this case, No. 19-CV-10587.
Judge Colleen McMahon also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied the plaintiff permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees.
The detailed version
- DeJesus-Vazquez v. Bethencourt · No. 1:19-cv-10587
- Colleen McMahon
- Dec. 5, 2019
Background
The court received the plaintiff’s submission labeled a “Memorandum of Law” on November 12, 2019. The submission was assigned a new case number and opened as a new civil action. After reviewing it, the court concluded that it should have been filed as a memorandum opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss in an earlier related action, No. 19-CV-0697.
Ruling
The court directed the Clerk of Court to docket the complaint in this action, identified as ECF No. 1, as the plaintiff’s memorandum opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss in the earlier related action. The court also directed the Clerk to terminate all pending matters and administratively close this action, No. 19-CV-10587. The court ordered that the action be assigned to Judge McMahon’s docket, that a copy of the order be mailed to the plaintiff, and that service be noted on the docket.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied the plaintiff’s status to appeal without prepaying filing fees. The order did not decide the underlying motion to dismiss.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.