No v. Salvation Army
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-11282
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In No v. Salvation Army, Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint after No failed to file the required amended complaint.
Jeong-Suk No's complaint was dismissed, all pending motions were terminated, and permission to appeal without paying required fees was denied. The Salvation Army, Markle Residence, prevailed on the disposition described in the order.
What happened
In Jeong-Suk No v. Salvation Army, Markle Residence, the court had ordered No to file one amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal.
No did not file an amended complaint. Instead, No submitted nine letters, notices, or motions that the court described as largely unreadable and unclear, and none responded to the order to amend. The court dismissed the complaint for failing to state a claim for which relief could be granted.
Judge Colleen McMahon also directed the clerk to close all pending motions and ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, denying permission to appeal without paying the required fees.
The detailed version
- No v. Salvation Army · No. 1:19-cv-11282
- Colleen McMahon
- Apr. 27, 2020
Background
The court had previously ordered Plaintiff Jeong-Suk No to file an amended complaint within 60 days. That order stated that No had submitted more than a dozen illegible documents and required No to put any allegations to be considered into one amended complaint. The order also warned that failing to file the amended complaint would result in dismissal.
No did not file an amended complaint. Instead, No submitted nine documents labeled as letters, notices, or motions. The court described those documents as largely illegible and incoherent, said that most appeared to concern other actions No had filed, and found that none responded to the order to amend.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). This provision allows dismissal when a complaint filed without paying the filing fee does not state a legally sufficient claim. The court did not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
The court directed the clerk to mail the order to No, record service on the docket, and terminate all pending motions. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees. The opinion notes that, in a prior related proceeding, the court had barred No from filing civil actions in that court without first obtaining permission, but that No filed this action before that bar order was issued.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.