Nunez v. Silber
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:18-cv-00892
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Nunez v. Silber, Judge McMahon barred Javier Nunez from filing future submissions in the action, except a notice of appeal.
Javier Nunez is barred from filing future submissions in this action, except a notice of appeal, and may face additional sanctions for violations.
What happened
In Nunez v. Silber, the court considered whether to stop Javier Nunez, who was representing himself, from filing further documents in the action.
Nunez submitted a declaration opposing the proposed filing bar, but the court found his arguments insufficient. The court then barred him from filing any future submission in the action, except a notice of appeal, and warned that violations could lead to additional sanctions, including monetary penalties.
Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Nunez permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
The detailed version
- Nunez v. Silber · No. 1:18-cv-00892
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 28, 2022
Background
On January 10, 2022, the court ordered Javier Nunez, who was representing himself, to explain within 30 days why the court should not bar him from filing future submissions in the action. The proposed bar would have an exception for a notice of appeal. Nunez filed a declaration on January 17, 2022, opposing the bar.
Ruling
The court found Nunez's arguments insufficient and issued the filing injunction under 28 U.S.C. § 1651. It barred Nunez from filing any future submission in the action, except a notice of appeal. The court warned that violating the injunction could result in additional sanctions, including monetary penalties.
Appeal and effect
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The opinion does not explain the underlying dispute or the specific arguments Nunez made in his declaration.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.