Lee v. Proland Management

Background

The court received a one-page handwritten complaint purportedly brought by Kum Nam Lee against Proland Management. The complaint asserted claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and alleged discrimination after a Section 8 apartment application was denied. It sought damages of $10 million.

The filing did not include the required filing and administrative fees or a completed and signed application to proceed without paying those fees in advance. The court also reviewed the court’s electronic records and found that the submission appeared to have been filed by Young Yil Jo.

Filing Restrictions

The opinion states that Jo had filed hundreds of actions in the court, including cases in his own name and in the names of other purported plaintiffs. Earlier orders had barred Jo from filing a new civil action or proceeding in the court without first obtaining permission. Those orders also barred him from filing documents in the court in another person’s name.

Ruling

Because the court found that Jo filed this action in Lee’s name, it dismissed the action without prejudice to any civil action Lee might wish to bring in the future. The court did not decide the merits of the alleged discrimination, the Section 1983 claims, or the requested damages.

The court stated that it would continue dismissing actions or proceedings Jo filed in another person’s name, without prejudice to any action that person might wish to bring. It warned that additional restrictions and sanctions could be imposed if Jo continued doing so. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepayment of fees.

Effect

The dismissal ended this action, but the opinion expressly preserved Lee’s ability to bring a future civil action. The filing restrictions and warning applied to Jo. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Lee and Jo and record service on the docket.