Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 12, 2020

Felder v. Atria Builders

Judge
Louis Stanton
Docket
1:20-cv-08842
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Felder v. Atrus Builders, Chief Judge McMahon ordered Sean G. Felder to pay fees or amend his IFP application within 30 days.

Who this affects

Sean G. Felder must either pay $400 in filing and administrative fees or submit an amended IFP application within 30 days; otherwise, the action will be dismissed. The order also denies IFP status for an appeal.

What happened

In Felder v. Atrus Builders, Sean G. Felder, representing himself, asked to proceed without paying the filing fees upfront. The court said the application did not provide enough information about his employment, income, and monthly expenses.

The court ordered Felder, within 30 days, either to pay $400 in fees or submit an amended application explaining his current financial situation and inability to pay. No summons was to issue at that time.

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon did not rule on the underlying case. She warned that the action would be dismissed if Felder did not comply and denied permission to appeal without paying fees because any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Felder v. Atria Builders · No. 1:20-cv-08842
Judge
Louis Stanton
Date
Nov. 12, 2020

Background

Sean G. Felder brought the action pro se, meaning without a lawyer. He submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), which asks the court to allow a person to proceed without paying court fees in advance.

The application required a $400 payment: a $350 filing fee and a $50 administrative fee. Felder's application stated that he was not presently unemployed but did not provide his last employment date or prior gross monthly wages. He also indicated that he received no income from listed sources but did not explain how he paid his expenses. In addition, he did not provide details about his housing, transportation, utilities, or other monthly expenses.

Court's Action

The court stated that it could not determine from the incomplete application whether Felder had enough money to pay the filing fees. It therefore ordered him, within 30 days of the order, either to pay the $400 in fees or submit an amended IFP application addressing the identified deficiencies and providing facts showing that he could not pay.

The order stated that, if the amended IFP application were granted, Felder could proceed without paying the fees in advance. It also directed the Clerk of Court to send Felder the order and record service on the docket. No summons was to issue at that time. If Felder failed to comply within the allowed period, the action would be dismissed.

Disposition and Classification

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon did not grant or deny the IFP application. Instead, she directed payment of fees or submission of an amended application. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. This is a procedural order concerning payment of fees and the IFP application, not a decision on the merits of Felder's claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.