Frost v. NYC MTA

Background

Yvonne Frost filed a new civil complaint on March 3, 2020. The court had previously barred her from filing new civil actions in the Southern District of New York without first obtaining permission, when she sought to proceed without paying filing fees. The court later added requirements for any new filing, including a motion for permission, a copy of the restriction order, the required fees or an application to proceed without paying them, and a sworn statement addressing frivolousness, bad faith, improper purpose, and compliance with court rules and orders.

Frost submitted the required documents, so the case was opened and assigned a case number. After reviewing her motion, declaration, and proposed complaint, the court concluded that the action continued her pattern of vexatious and nonmeritorious filings. The court stated that Frost alleged no facts suggesting a plausible claim for relief.

Ruling

The court denied Frost’s request for permission to file the new civil action because she had not shown good cause. It also denied her request to proceed without paying filing fees and directed the Clerk of Court to close the action. The earlier restriction on filing new civil actions without first seeking permission remained in effect.

The court warned that continued frivolous complaints could result in additional sanctions, including further filing restrictions and monetary penalties. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

Effect

The proposed action did not proceed, and the Clerk was directed to close the case. The opinion does not decide the merits of any underlying claim; it denies permission to file based on the filing restrictions and the court’s conclusion that the proposed complaint lacked a plausible claim.