Genao v. 5th precinct
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-02834
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Genao v. 5th Precinct, Judge McMahon dismissed the action without prejudice because Genao did not follow an earlier filing restriction.
Elvin Genao's action against the 5th Precinct was dismissed without prejudice; the court also denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
Elvin Genao brought this case against the 5th Precinct without a lawyer. He had not paid the filing fee or submitted an application to proceed without paying it.
The court had previously barred Genao from filing a new federal civil case without paying the fee unless the court first allowed him to proceed without payment. Because he did not comply with that earlier order, the court dismissed this action without prejudice to the extent he sought to proceed without paying the fee.
Judge Colleen McMahon directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order to Genao and record service. She also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Genao permission to proceed without paying the appeal fee.
The detailed version
- Genao v. 5th precinct · No. 1:20-cv-02834
- Colleen McMahon
- Apr. 7, 2020
Background
Elvin Genao filed this action against the 5th Precinct without a lawyer. The court stated that Genao had not paid the filing fee and had not submitted an application to proceed without paying fees, commonly called an IFP application.
The court also noted that, in an earlier order dated June 5, 2019, it had barred Genao from filing any new federal civil action without paying the filing fee unless he first obtained the court's permission to proceed without payment.
Ruling
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the court dismissed this action without prejudice to the extent Genao sought to proceed without paying the filing fee. The stated reason was Genao's failure to comply with the June 5, 2019 order. The court did not reach the underlying claims against the 5th Precinct.
The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Genao a copy of the order and note service on the docket. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) 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.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.