Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 6, 2019

Frost v. City of New York

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:19-cv-11111
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Frost v. City of New York, Judge McMahon dismissed Frost’s new case without prejudice for violating an earlier filing order and denied fee-free status for appeal.

Who this affects

Yvonne Frost’s new case was dismissed without prejudice, and her request to proceed without paying fees on appeal was denied. The City of New York (HRA) and the other defendants were not required to litigate the underlying claims in this action.

What happened

In Frost v. City of New York (HRA), Yvonne Frost filed a new case without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee.

The court said an earlier November 7, 2019 order barred Frost from filing any new fee-free case unless she first obtained the court’s permission. The opinion states that Frost had not sought that permission.

Judge McMahon dismissed this case without prejudice because Frost did not comply with the earlier order. The court also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for the appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Frost v. City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-11111
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Dec. 6, 2019

Background

Yvonne Frost filed this pro se case against the City of New York (HRA) and other defendants. She sought permission to proceed without paying the filing fee, known as in forma pauperis status.

The court stated that, in an earlier order dated November 7, 2019, Frost had been barred from filing any new action without first obtaining the court’s permission to file. The court stated that Frost filed this new case without seeking that permission.

Ruling

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the court dismissed the action without prejudice because Frost failed to comply with the November 7 order. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied in forma pauperis status for purposes of an appeal. The clerk was directed to assign the matter to Judge McMahon’s docket, send Frost a copy of the order, and record service on the docket.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.