Onatola v. Prostestant Churches and all other religious Organizations
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-06232
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Onatolu v. Prostestant Churches, Judge McMahon dismissed the pro se action without prejudice because Onatolu violated an earlier filing restriction.
Adekunle A. Onatolu’s action was dismissed without prejudice, and permission to proceed without paying fees was denied for an appeal; the court did not reach the claims against the religious organizations.
What happened
In Adekunle A. Onatolu v. Prostestant Churches and All Other Religious Organizations, Onatolu filed a new civil action without a lawyer and requested permission to proceed without paying filing fees. An earlier court order had barred him from filing new civil actions in that court without first obtaining permission.
Onatolu had not asked for that permission before filing this case. The court therefore dismissed the action without prejudice for failing to comply with the earlier order. The opinion does not address the substance of the action against the religious organizations.
Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Onatola v. Prostestant Churches and all other religious Organizations · No. 1:20-cv-06232
- Colleen McMahon
- Aug. 10, 2020
Background
On July 9, 2015, the court entered an order barring Plaintiff from filing any new civil action in the Southern District of New York without paying filing fees unless he first obtained the court’s permission. The restriction applied to filings seeking permission to proceed without paying filing fees. In this case, Plaintiff filed a new action without a lawyer, requested that status, and did not seek the required permission.
Ruling
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the court dismissed the action without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to comply with the July 9, 2015 order in a prior related proceeding. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal itself did not bar refiling, although the opinion states that the earlier filing restriction remained relevant. The court did not decide the substance of Plaintiff’s claims against Prostestant Churches and All Other Religious Organizations.
Appeal and Case Administration
The court directed the Clerk of Court to assign the matter to Judge McMahon’s docket, mail Plaintiff a copy of the order, and record service on the docket. The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.