Levy v. Baruch College
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-07106
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Levy v. Baruch College, Chief Judge McMahon granted more time to pay fees or renew a fee-waiver application, warning noncompliance would dismiss the action.
Fred Levy and the pending action against Baruch College and the New York City Department of Finance; the order required Levy to pay the filing fee or submit a sufficient second amended fee-waiver application.
What happened
Levy v. Baruch College concerns Fred Levy’s attempt to proceed without paying the $400 filing fee by submitting an application showing he could not afford it. The court found his first amended application deficient and denied permission to proceed without paying the fee.
After Levy objected and requested more time, the court gave him another opportunity to either pay the fee or submit a second amended application. Levy requested an extension until January 25, 2020, citing the possible significance of his discrimination allegations, Senator Patrick Toomey’s review of his case, and his efforts to find a lawyer.
Chief Judge McMahon granted the extension until January 25, 2020. The order warned that the case would be dismissed if Levy did not pay the fee or submit the second amended application by that date, and stated that no further extensions would be granted. The court also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from the order.
The detailed version
- Levy v. Baruch College · No. 1:19-cv-07106
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 8, 2020
Background
Fred Levy sued Baruch College and the New York City Department of Finance. The court had previously directed him to either pay the $400 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying it based on inability to afford the fee. After granting one extension, the court found Levy’s amended application deficient and denied permission to proceed without paying the fee.
Levy then sent letters arguing that the court lacked authority to deny him permission to proceed without paying the fee. The court explained that 28 U.S.C. § 1915 gives it broad discretion to decide whether a person has adequately shown an inability to pay. Because it was unclear whether Levy misunderstood the financial-information requirement or was deliberately withholding income information, the court gave him another opportunity to pay the fee or submit a second amended application.
Levy’s Request
On December 19, 2019, Levy requested another extension, until January 25, 2020. He stated that his case might involve discrimination, blacklisting, harassment, age discrimination, and other discrimination. He also said that Senator Patrick Toomey was reviewing his case and that he was looking for an attorney.
Ruling
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon granted Levy’s request for another extension. The order gave him until January 25, 2020, to pay the $400 filing fee or submit a second amended application to proceed without paying it. The court stated that he had to pay the fee regardless of what Senator Toomey did or whether he found an attorney.
The order further stated that the action would be dismissed if Levy failed to comply by the deadline, that no further extensions would be granted, and that future requests to delay compliance would be summarily denied. The court also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The opinion did not decide the merits of Levy’s allegations against the defendants.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.