Traore v. New York State Division of Parole
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-01431
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Traore v. New York State Division of Parole, Judge Swain ordered payment or a corrected fee-waiver application within 30 days.
Abdoulaye Traore, who had to pay the fees or submit a corrected IFP application within 30 days to avoid dismissal of the action.
What happened
In Traore v. New York State Division of Parole, Abdoulaye Traore, representing himself, submitted an application asking to proceed without paying court fees in advance.
The court could not decide that request because Traore had not signed the application and had not fully answered questions about his finances, including how he paid his expenses. The court also stated that no summons would issue at that time.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered Traore, within 30 days, either to pay $402 in fees or submit a completed and signed amended application. The order warned that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply and denied fee-waived appeal status because any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Traore v. New York State Division of Parole · No. 1:22-cv-01431
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 22, 2022
Background
Abdoulaye Traore brought the action without a lawyer against the New York State Division of Parole, PRS Tarji Smith, SPO Tucker, and Parole Officer A. Hamilton. The opinion states that Traore filed the complaint after being released from New York City Department of Correction custody, although it appeared he prepared it while still in custody.
To proceed with the case, Traore had to either pay $402 in filing and administrative fees or submit a signed application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning without paying the fees in advance. Federal law requires an IFP applicant to provide information supporting the request.
Deficiencies in the Application
Traore submitted an IFP application without a signature. He also did not fully answer questions about his financial situation. In particular, he indicated that he received no income from the listed sources but did not answer the follow-up question asking how he paid his expenses. He answered “None” and “No” to the remaining financial questions identified by the court.
Order
Because the application was unsigned and the court could not determine whether Traore had enough money to pay the fees, the court did not rule on his IFP request. The court ordered Traore, within 30 days of the order, either to pay the $402 in fees or complete, sign, and submit the attached amended IFP application using docket number 22-CV-1431 (LTS). If the court grants the amended application, Traore may proceed without paying the fees in advance.
No summons would issue at that time. The order stated that the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures if Traore complied, and that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply within the allowed period. The court also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk was directed to mail the order to Traore and record service on the docket.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.