Liner v. Hochul
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:21-cv-11116
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Liner v. Hochul, Judge Swain denied IFP and ordered Liner to pay $402 after he did not disclose previously reported settlement funds.
Joshua Liner and the continuation of his action against Kathy Hochul and the other named defendants.
What happened
In Liner v. Hochul, Joshua Liner, who was representing himself, asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. He had previously told the court that he had received a large settlement and expected payments, but his later application said he was unemployed, received $800 per month in Social Security benefits, and had no money or assets.
The court noted that Liner had paid $405 by money order, although the court refunded that payment and told him to pay exactly $402 or submit a completed application to proceed without paying. Liner did not disclose the settlement funds in his application. The court denied his application and ordered him to pay exactly $402 within 30 days.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ordered that no summons issue yet and stated that the case would proceed if Liner paid on time; otherwise, the action would be dismissed. The court further certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Liner v. Hochul · No. 1:21-cv-11116
- Edgardo Ramos
- Feb. 18, 2022
Background
Joshua Liner, who appeared without a lawyer, sought permission to proceed without paying the filing fee, a status commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis. The court had directed him either to pay the $402 fee for a federal civil action or submit a completed and signed application for that status.
Liner first told the court that he had “just got a huge settlement,” that checks should begin arriving within two weeks, and that he would pay the filing fee instead of submitting an application. He then paid $405 by money order. The court directed the Clerk of Court to refund the $405 and gave Liner another 30 days to pay exactly $402 or submit an application.
Liner submitted an application stating that he was unemployed, received $800 per month in Social Security benefits, had no money or other assets, paid an unspecified amount of rent, did not financially support anyone else, and had no other financial obligations. The application did not mention the settlement funds he had previously said he expected to receive. In a later letter, Liner stated that the money order had not been returned and that he had no other funds, while also saying he would convert the $405 money order to $402 after receiving it. The court noted that the Clerk had mailed the refund by certified mail.
Ruling
The court denied Liner’s application to proceed without paying the filing fee. It relied on his $405 payment as indicating that he could pay the fee and on his failure to report the fact and amount of the settlement funds in his application.
The court ordered Liner to pay exactly $402 within 30 days of the order. No summons would issue at that time. If Liner complied, the action would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures; if he did not comply within the allowed period, the action would be dismissed. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court ruled on Liner’s application to proceed without paying the filing fee and set a payment condition before the case could proceed. The order did not decide the underlying claims against Kathy Hochul or the other defendants.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.