Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 18, 2021

Scott v. Tonkin

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:21-cv-01306
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Scott v. Tonkin, Judge McMahon dismissed the pro se action without prejudice because Scott did not obtain required permission to file it.

Who this affects

Tonia’ Scott’s lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice, and her request to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal was denied.

What happened

Scott v. Tonkin concerned Tonia’ Scott’s new lawsuit and her request to proceed without paying filing fees. The court had previously barred her from filing any new action without paying fees unless she first obtained permission.

Scott filed this action without a permission application attached to her proposed complaint. The opinion states that she was representing herself.

Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the case without prejudice for violating the earlier filing order, directed the Clerk to close the case, and denied fee-free status for any appeal because an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Scott v. Tonkin · No. 1:21-cv-01306
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Feb. 18, 2021

Background

Tonia’ Scott filed a new action while representing herself and asked to proceed without paying filing fees. In a June 20, 2017 order, the court had barred Scott from filing any new action without paying fees unless she first obtained the court’s permission to file it.

Reason for dismissal

Scott did not submit an application for permission with her proposed complaint. The court therefore dismissed the case for failing to comply with the June 20, 2017 order.

Ruling and case status

Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the case without prejudice. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Scott a copy of the order, note service on the docket, and close the action. The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.