Rushing v. Extra Space Storage
- Laura Swain
- 1:21-cv-09113
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rushing v. Extra Space Storage, Judge Swain barred future civil filings without paying fees unless Rushing first obtained permission, closed the case, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Shaun Rushing, who is barred from filing future civil actions without paying filing fees in the Southern District of New York unless he first obtains the court's permission.
What happened
In Rushing v. Extra Space Storage, Shaun Rushing challenged events that occurred exclusively in Michigan. The court had previously dismissed the case without prejudice because venue was improper.
The court then ordered Rushing to explain, in a declaration, why he should not be barred from filing future cases without paying filing fees unless he first received permission. Rushing did not submit the required declaration.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered the filing bar, closed the case, and denied fee-free status for any appeal. Rushing must request permission and attach a proposed complaint and the order before filing another civil case without paying filing fees in this court.
The detailed version
- Rushing v. Extra Space Storage · No. 1:21-cv-09113
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 3, 2022
Background
Shaun Rushing, representing himself and proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning without paying the usual court-filing fees, filed this action concerning events that occurred exclusively in Michigan. On November 5, 2021, the court dismissed the action without prejudice for improper venue. The court also noted that Rushing had filed other cases in this court concerning events occurring exclusively in Michigan and naming defendants who resided outside the district. The court further noted that Rushing had been barred from filing cases in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan because of cases that court found “indisputably meritless.”
Show-Cause Order
The November 5 order required Rushing to submit a declaration within 30 days explaining why he should not be barred from filing additional IFP actions in the Southern District of New York without prior permission. The court warned that failure to submit the declaration, or failure to show good cause against the proposed injunction, would result in the filing bar. Rushing did not submit the required declaration.
Ruling
Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered an order under 28 U.S.C. § 1651 barring Rushing from filing future civil actions IFP in this court unless he first obtained leave from the court. To seek permission, Rushing must file a motion with the Pro Se Intake Unit, attach the proposed complaint and a copy of the bar order, and obtain permission before filing. The court stated that any action filed without the required permission motion would be dismissed for failure to comply with the order.
The court also warned that continued submission of meritless actions, or actions concerning events exclusively in Michigan and naming defendants who do not reside in the district, could result in additional sanctions, including monetary penalties. The clerk was directed to close the action and terminate any motions. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.