O'Neil v. Provenzano
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:19-cv-05283
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In O'Neil v. Provenzano, Judge Ramos denied Provenzano's request to appeal without paying fees, finding the appeal would not be in good faith.
Daniel Provenzano's request to appeal without paying court fees was denied; the existing default judgment order was not changed by this order.
What happened
Patricia O'Neil sued Daniel Provenzano for defamation and related claims. O'Neil was representing herself. Provenzano had been served but never appeared, and the court entered a default judgment against him after he also failed to attend a required hearing.
Provenzano filed a notice of appeal and asked to proceed without paying the usual filing fees. The court considered whether his appeal would be taken in good faith, meaning it raised a serious, non-frivolous issue.
Judge Edgardo Ramos ruled that any appeal from the default judgment would not be taken in good faith. He denied Provenzano's request to proceed without paying fees for the appeal and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion.
The detailed version
- O'Neil v. Provenzano · No. 1:19-cv-05283
- Edgardo Ramos
- Oct. 29, 2020
Background
On June 5, 2019, Patricia O'Neil, representing herself, brought an action against Daniel Provenzano for defamation and related claims. Provenzano had been served but never appeared. On July 28, 2020, the Clerk issued a certificate of default judgment as to Provenzano. On October 9, 2020, the court held a hearing requiring Provenzano to explain why default judgment should not be entered; he did not appear, and the court issued a default judgment order against him.
Motion and Ruling
On October 23, 2020, Provenzano filed a notice of appeal and moved to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning without paying the required court fees. The court found that an appeal from the default judgment order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied in forma pauperis status for purposes of the appeal and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it decided an ancillary filing-fee issue concerning an appeal rather than the underlying defamation claims. The order did not address the merits of those claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.