Johnson-El v. Deprospo
- Louis Stanton
- 1:20-cv-02878
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Johnson-El v. DeProspo, Judge McMahon granted reconsideration, vacated dismissal, and allowed 30 days to pay fees or file an IFP application.
The plaintiff’s previously dismissed action was reopened when the court vacated the dismissal and judgment. The plaintiff had 30 days to pay the $400 filing fees or submit a completed IFP application; otherwise, the court stated it would dismiss the action without prejudice. IFP status for an appeal was denied.
What happened
In Johnson-El v. DeProspo, the court had dismissed the action because the plaintiff neither paid the required $400 filing fees nor submitted an application to proceed without paying those fees.
The plaintiff later sent a letter explaining that he believed courthouse closures and delayed mail during the COVID-19 matter prevented him from responding on time. The court treated the letter as a request to change the judgment and reconsider the dismissal.
Judge McMahon granted the request, vacated the earlier dismissal and judgment, and gave the plaintiff 30 days to pay the $400 fees or submit a completed application to proceed without paying them. The court stated that it would not grant another extension and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, so fee-free appeal status was denied.
The detailed version
- Johnson-El v. Deprospo · No. 1:20-cv-02878
- Louis Stanton
- July 15, 2020
Background
On April 9, 2020, the court ordered the plaintiff to pay the $400 filing fees required to start the action or submit an application to proceed without paying the fees, commonly called an IFP application. The plaintiff did neither within 30 days. On June 10, 2020, the court dismissed the action without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar a later filing, and entered judgment the next day.
Plaintiff’s Request
The court received the plaintiff’s July 2, 2020 letter asking the court to reconsider and allow the case to be heard because he believed his rights had been violated. He said he believed courts were not accepting documents for a period because of the COVID-19 matter, that a courthouse security guard told him the courts were closed, and that delayed mail prevented him from mailing documents during April, May, and early June.
Ruling
The court construed the letter as a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) and as a motion for reconsideration under Local Civil Rule 6.3. Judge Colleen McMahon granted the motion and vacated the June 10 order of dismissal and judgment. The court granted the plaintiff 30 days to pay the $400 filing fees or submit a completed IFP application, attaching a form for his convenience. The court stated that it would not grant any further extensions and that failure to pay or submit the completed application within the allowed time would result in dismissal without prejudice.
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. It therefore denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the underlying allegations against the defendant.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.