Sun v. New York City Police Department
- Laura Swain
- 1:18-cv-11002
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Sun v. New York City Police Department, Judge Swain denied Sun’s motions, including reconsideration and extensions, and denied appeal fee-waiver status.
Yi Sun’s requests to change the earlier order, extend appeal-related deadlines, and appeal without paying the filing fee were denied as specified in the order. The defendants’ earlier partial dismissal ruling was not changed.
What happened
In Sun v. New York City Police Department, Yi Sun asked the court to change its earlier order, extend the time to file an appeal and pay the filing fee, and allow her to appeal without paying the fee. The earlier order had granted defendants’ motions to dismiss the complaint in part.
The court denied the request to add or change factual findings because the earlier order made no factual findings and could not resolve factual disputes at that stage. It denied the request for more time to file an appeal as moot because Sun had already filed a notice of appeal. It denied the request for more time to pay the filing fee, without prejudice to asking the appeals court for that extension.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied reconsideration of the earlier decision that Sun had no good-faith basis for an appeal. The court again denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee and certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Sun v. New York City Police Department · No. 1:18-cv-11002
- Laura Swain
- Sept. 2, 2020
Background
Yi Sun filed two motions concerning the court’s August 6, 2020 Memorandum Opinion and Order. That earlier order granted in part defendants’ motions to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), which concerns subject-matter jurisdiction, and Rule 12(b)(6), which concerns whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim. Sun sought to add or amend findings of fact, requested more time to file a notice of appeal and pay the appeal filing fee, and sought permission to appeal without paying the fee.
Motion to Add or Amend Findings
The court denied Sun’s motion to add or amend findings of fact. It explained that the August 6 order made no findings of fact. On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the court must accept nonconclusory factual allegations in the complaint as true and draw reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor. The court is not permitted to resolve factual disputes at that stage. The court therefore found no legal basis for the requested relief.
Requests for More Time
The court denied as moot Sun’s request for more time to file a notice of appeal because she had already filed that notice. The court denied her request for more time to pay the filing fee, without prejudice to her ability to ask the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for such an extension.
Reconsideration and Appeal Without Paying the Filing Fee
The court treated Sun’s request to appeal without paying the filing fee as a request to reconsider its earlier determination that an appeal from the August 6 order would not be taken in good faith. Reconsideration is an extraordinary remedy, and the moving party must show an intervening change in controlling law, new evidence, a clear error, or a need to prevent manifest injustice. The court found that Sun identified no legal or factual basis for reconsideration and denied the motion.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The order resolved Docket Entry Nos. 110 and 112.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.