Frost v. NYPD
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-05283
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Frost v. N.Y.P.D., Judge McMahon denied Yvonne Frost permission to file and proceed without fees, closed the case, and continued filing restrictions.
Yvonne Frost was denied permission to file this new civil action and to proceed without paying filing fees; the court’s prior filing restrictions remained in effect, and the action was closed.
What happened
In Frost v. N.Y.P.D., the court considered Yvonne Frost’s new complaint after earlier orders restricted her ability to file new civil actions without first obtaining permission. She submitted most of the documents required by those orders but did not attach a copy of one earlier order.
The court found that the new case continued Frost’s pattern of frivolous and nonmeritorious filings and that she did not plead facts showing a plausible claim for relief. It therefore denied her permission to file the action and directed the Clerk of Court to close it.
Judge Colleen McMahon also denied Frost’s application to proceed without paying filing fees, kept the earlier filing restrictions in effect, warned that further frivolous complaints could lead to additional sanctions, and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Frost v. NYPD · No. 1:20-cv-05283
- Colleen McMahon
- Aug. 3, 2020
Background
An earlier order barred Yvonne Frost from filing new civil actions in the Southern District of New York without paying the filing fee or first obtaining permission from the court to proceed without paying it. After Frost continued filing what the court described as frivolous actions, another order imposed additional pre-filing requirements. Those requirements included submitting a motion for permission to file, a copy of the February 14, 2020 order, the applicable filing fee or an application to proceed without paying it, and a sworn statement addressing whether the claims were frivolous, brought in bad faith, or filed for an improper purpose.
Frost filed this complaint on July 2, 2020. The court stated that she submitted many of the required documents but did not attach a copy of the earlier bar order.
Court’s Analysis
The court reviewed Frost’s submissions and concluded that the new action was consistent with her pattern of vexatious and nonmeritorious filings. It stated that Frost had not pleaded facts suggesting a plausible claim for relief and had not shown good cause for permission to file the action.
Ruling
Judge Colleen McMahon denied Frost’s motion for permission to file the new civil action and denied her application to proceed without paying filing fees. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the action. The earlier orders restricting Frost’s ability to file new civil actions without first seeking permission remained in effect.
The court warned that continued submission of frivolous complaints could result in additional sanctions, including further restrictions on filing new civil actions and monetary penalties. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.