Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 18, 2020

Federick v. Araya Monge

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:20-cv-02347
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Freiber Federick v. Johny Araya Monge, Judge McMahon required payment or a corrected fee-waiver application before the case could proceed.

Who this affects

Freiber Federick was required to pay $400 in fees or submit a complete amended fee-waiver application with a recognizable mailing address within thirty days, or the court would dismiss the action. No summons issued at that time.

What happened

Freiber Federick sued Johny Araya Monge and others without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying filing fees upfront. The court found that his application was incomplete and unclear.

The court gave Federick thirty days to either pay $400 in fees or submit a corrected application fully describing his finances and providing a recognizable mailing address. No summons would issue at that time.

Judge Colleen McMahon said the application could not be approved yet and warned that the case would be dismissed if Federick did not comply. She also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Federick v. Araya Monge · No. 1:20-cv-02347
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Mar. 18, 2020

Background

Freiber Federick brought the action without a lawyer and requested permission to proceed without prepaying court fees, a status commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis. The court explained that filing a civil action ordinarily requires $400: a $350 filing fee and a $50 administrative fee.

Federick submitted an application for this fee waiver, but the court found it incomplete and unclear. He indicated that he was incarcerated and did not receive payments from the institution where he was incarcerated, but the court noted that his listed mailing address did not appear to be a jail, prison, or other facility address and was not recognizable as a mailing address. The application also did not answer questions about his employment, income, bank-account funds, property and other assets, monthly expenses, people he financially supported, or other financial obligations.

Court’s Action

The court did not grant Federick permission to proceed without prepaying fees at that time. It ordered him, within thirty days of March 18, 2020, to either pay the $400 in fees or complete and submit an amended fee-waiver application that fully disclosed his financial status and included a recognizable mailing address. If he was incarcerated, the order also required him to provide his identification number and, with an amended application, submit a prisoner authorization form. The order stated that if the court found he had enough money to pay the fees, it could require payment.

The court directed the Clerk of Court to send the order to Federick by email and record service on the docket. No summons would issue at that time. If Federick complied, the action would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures; if he failed to comply within the allowed time, the court would dismiss the action. Judge Colleen McMahon also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.