Frost v. US Government
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-05694
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Frost v. US Government, Judge McMahon denied Frost’s filing permission and fee-free status, closed the action, and warned of further sanctions.
Yvonne Frost, whose request to file the new action and application to proceed without paying filing fees were denied; the case was closed, and existing filing restrictions remained in effect.
What happened
In Frost v. US Government, Yvonne Frost filed a new complaint after earlier court orders restricted her ability to file civil actions without permission. She submitted most of the documents required by those orders but did not provide a copy of one order.
The court reviewed her request, letter, and proposed complaint and found that the filing continued her pattern of frivolous and nonmeritorious cases. The court concluded that she had not shown good cause to file the action and that she had not alleged facts supporting a plausible claim for relief.
Judge Colleen McMahon denied Frost’s request to file the action and her application to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court directed the Clerk to close the case, warned that further frivolous filings could lead to additional filing restrictions and monetary penalties, and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Frost v. US Government · No. 1:20-cv-05694
- Colleen McMahon
- July 24, 2020
Background
Yvonne Frost filed a new complaint against US Government, Court of Appeals, N.Y.P.D., City of New York (HRA), and CVR Associates Inc. The court had previously barred Frost from filing new civil actions in that court without first obtaining permission to proceed without paying filing fees. In a later order, the court required her to submit additional materials with any new complaint, including a motion for permission to file, the earlier 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.
Frost filed the new complaint on July 21, 2020. The opinion states that she submitted the required materials except for a copy of the February 14, 2020 order.
Court’s Analysis
After reviewing Frost’s motion for permission to file, accompanying letter, and proposed complaint, the court concluded that the case continued her pattern of vexatious and nonmeritorious filings. The court also found that she alleged no facts suggesting a plausible claim for relief and had not shown good cause for permission to file the action.
Disposition
The court denied Frost’s motion for permission to file the new civil action and denied her application to proceed without paying filing fees. It directed the Clerk of Court to close the action. The court left the earlier filing restrictions in effect and warned that additional frivolous complaints could result in further filing restrictions and monetary penalties. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.