Frost v. N.Y.P.D.
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-05661
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Frost v. N.Y.P.D., Judge McMahon denied permission to file and fee-waiver status, closed the case, and maintained filing restrictions.
Yvonne Frost’s ability to file new civil actions in the Southern District of New York was restricted. The court denied her permission to file this action, denied her application to proceed without paying filing fees, closed the action, kept earlier filing restrictions in effect, and denied fee-waiver status for an appeal.
What happened
In Frost v. N.Y.P.D., Yvonne Frost filed a new complaint after earlier orders restricted her ability to start civil cases in this court without permission. The restrictions followed what the court described as many frivolous filings.
The court reviewed Frost’s request, letter, and proposed complaint and found no facts suggesting a plausible claim for relief. It concluded that she had not shown good reason to file this new action, denied her permission to file it, and directed the Clerk to close the case.
Judge Colleen McMahon also denied Frost’s application to proceed without paying filing fees, kept the earlier filing restrictions in place, warned of possible additional restrictions and monetary penalties, and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal because an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Frost v. N.Y.P.D. · No. 1:20-cv-05661
- Colleen McMahon
- July 28, 2020
Background
An earlier order barred Yvonne Frost from filing any new civil action in the Southern District of New York without first obtaining permission from the court to proceed without paying filing fees. After the court concluded that Frost continued to file many frivolous civil actions, a later order imposed additional filing requirements. For a new complaint, Frost had to submit a motion for permission to file, a copy of the later order, the filing fees or an application to proceed without paying them, and a statement under penalty of perjury addressing the claims’ merits, purpose, and compliance with court rules and orders.
Frost filed the new complaint on July 20, 2020. The opinion states that she submitted the required documents 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 action continued her pattern of vexatious and nonmeritorious filings. The court stated that Frost alleged no facts suggesting a plausible claim for relief and had not shown good cause—meaning a sufficient reason—to allow the new action to be filed.
Rulings
The court denied Frost’s leave to file the new civil action and directed the Clerk of Court to close the action. In the conclusion, the court also denied her application to proceed without paying filing fees and her motion for leave to file. The prior orders requiring her to seek permission before filing new civil actions remained in effect.
The court warned that continued submission of frivolous complaints could lead to additional sanctions, including further filing restrictions and monetary penalties. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Frost permission to proceed without paying appellate filing fees.
Judge
Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon issued and signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.