Williams, Scott & Associates LLC v. United States
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-08736
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Williams, Scott & Associates LLC v. United States, Judge McMahon dismissed John T. Williams’s untimely Federal Tort Claims Act complaint after screening.
The plaintiffs’ Federal Tort Claims Act action was dismissed as untimely. John T. Williams was also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
What happened
Williams, Scott & Associates LLC v. United States concerned an action under the Federal Tort Claims Act filed by John T. Williams, who represented himself and requested permission to proceed without paying filing fees. The complaint involved events addressed in an earlier related proceeding.
The court ordered Williams to explain why the case should not be dismissed as late. He submitted a response and attached the same Department of Justice letter denying reconsideration of his administrative tort claim. The court concluded that the claims were untimely.
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint under the statute governing screening of cases filed without prepayment of fees. She also denied permission to appeal without paying fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Williams, Scott & Associates LLC v. United States · No. 1:19-cv-08736
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 10, 2020
Background
John T. Williams, proceeding without a lawyer and requesting permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees, filed a complaint under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The caption also lists Williams, Scott & Associates LLC and WSA LLC as plaintiffs, and names the United States of America as defendant.
In an earlier related proceeding, Williams asserted Federal Tort Claims Act claims concerning the same events. Attached to that earlier complaint was an August 2, 2018 letter from the Department of Justice denying reconsideration of an administrative tort claim. The court in that proceeding dismissed the claims for failure to state a claim and observed that they also appeared untimely.
Court’s reasoning
Because it was not completely clear whether Williams relied on the same administrative claim, the court ordered him to show cause—meaning to explain—why the new complaint should not be dismissed as untimely. Williams submitted a declaration and attached the same August 2, 2018 letter.
The court concluded that the Federal Tort Claims Act claims were untimely under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2401(b) and 2675(a). It therefore dismissed the action for the reasons stated in its November 12, 2019 order. The court also recited its authority to dismiss complaints filed without prepayment of fees that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court’s warning that future duplicative or frivolous litigation could lead to restrictions on filing new cases without prior permission remained in effect; the court did not impose that filing restriction in this order.
Disposition
Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon directed the Clerk to mail the order to Williams and record service on the docket. The complaint, filed without prepayment of fees, was dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.