David-Barlow v. N.Y. N.J Marriage Lic. Agency's

Background

Clinton C. Barlow and Sarah M. David-Barlow filed the action without lawyers. They alleged that the temporary closure of the New York City Marriage Bureau during the COVID-19 pandemic violated their constitutional rights.

Although Sarah M. David-Barlow appeared in the complaint’s caption, she did not sign the complaint or submit an application to proceed without paying the court’s filing fees. On May 4, 2020, the court directed her to submit an application and a declaration confirming that she intended to participate as a plaintiff. She did not respond.

Procedural History and Ruling

On August 3, 2020, the court dismissed Sarah M. Barlow as a plaintiff and directed Clinton C. Barlow to notify the court within 30 days whether he wished to continue. The court warned that failure to comply, without a showing of good cause, would result in dismissal without prejudice. Neither plaintiff communicated with the court after filing the complaint.

The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal did not bar refiling, although the opinion does not address the merits of the constitutional allegations. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying court fees for purposes of an appeal.

Naming Note

The opinion’s caption identifies the plaintiff as Sarah M. David-Barlow, while parts of the text refer to her as Sarah M. Barlow. This summary follows the caption when identifying her.