Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 27, 2019

Wells v. New York State Courts

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:19-cv-05399
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Wells v. New York State Courts, Judge McMahon dismissed Michael E. Wells’s complaint without prejudice for failing to amend or update his address.

Who this affects

Michael E. Wells’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice because he did not file the required amended complaint or update his mailing address. The court also denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees on an appeal.

What happened

In Wells v. New York State Courts, Michael E. Wells brought a complaint against New York State Courts and the New York Dept. of Corrections. The court had ordered him to file an amended complaint within 60 days.

The court’s order was returned because Wells was no longer held at the facility where it had been sent. Wells did not file the amended complaint, notify the court of a new mailing address, or contact the court again.

Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The court also denied Wells permission to proceed without prepaying fees on an appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Wells v. New York State Courts · No. 1:19-cv-05399
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Dec. 27, 2019

Background

Michael E. Wells was the plaintiff in a case against New York State Courts and the New York Dept. of Corrections. The court had previously ordered Wells to file an amended complaint within 60 days. That order was returned on December 4, 2019, with a notation that Wells was no longer held at the facility where the order had been sent.

Wells did not comply with the order, did not notify the court that his mailing address had changed, and did not make further contact with the court. His complaint had been filed under a federal provision allowing a person to proceed without prepaying court fees.

Ruling

Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed Wells’s complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The opinion does not address the merits of the complaint. A dismissal without prejudice does not bar refiling the matter.

The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail Wells a copy of the order and record service on the docket. The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.

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.