Zawadzki v. Dept. of Justice
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-01973
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Zawadzki v. Dept. of Justice, Judge Swain dismissed the action because Young Yil Jo filed it in Zawadzki’s name, preserving Zawadzki’s ability to sue.
Kryst Zawadzki’s ability to bring a future civil action was preserved, while Young Yil Jo remained barred from filing new cases without permission or filing documents in another person’s name.
What happened
In Zawadzki v. Dept. of Justice, the court received an action supposedly brought by Kryst Zawadzki, but court records showed that Young Yil Jo had filed it. The court noted that Jo had previously filed lawsuits in Zawadzki’s name and had been barred from filing new cases in the Southern District of New York without permission.
The court dismissed this action without prejudice to any future civil action Zawadzki might bring. It also stated that Jo remained barred from filing cases without permission or filing documents in another person’s name. The court warned that additional restrictions or sanctions could follow if Jo continued this conduct, and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain issued and signed the order. The court based its decision on who filed the case and existing filing restrictions, not on the merits of any underlying claim.
The detailed version
- Zawadzki v. Dept. of Justice · No. 1:22-cv-01973
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 9, 2022
Background
The court received an action purportedly brought by Kryst Zawadzki. The opinion states that court records showed Young Yil Jo filed the submission. The court also referred to earlier related proceedings in which it had noted that Jo filed multiple lawsuits in Zawadzki’s name.
The opinion further states that, in an earlier proceeding, the court barred Jo from filing any new civil action or proceeding in the Southern District of New York without first obtaining the court’s permission.
Ruling
Because the court found that Jo filed this action, it dismissed the action without prejudice to any civil action Zawadzki might wish to bring in the future. The court stated that Jo’s existing restrictions remained in effect. Jo was also barred from filing any document in the court in another person’s name.
The court stated that it would continue to dismiss cases Jo filed in another person’s name without prejudice to that person’s ability to bring a case. It warned that continued filings could lead to additional restrictions and sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1651. The order did not address the merits of any underlying claim.
Appeal and service
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Jo and Zawadzki at the addresses listed in the opinion or on the docket.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order. The final disposition was: “The Court dismisses this action without prejudice to any civil action that Kryst Zawadzki may wish to bring in the future.”
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.