Horta Suarez v. Internal Revenue Service
- Laura Swain
- 1:21-cv-10879
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Horta Suarez v. Internal Revenue Service, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint after Horta Suarez missed the deadline to amend it.
The dismissal ended Horta Suarez’s complaint against the Internal Revenue Service and the United States Government. All pending motions were terminated, and fee-waived status was denied for an appeal.
What happened
Horta Suarez v. Internal Revenue Service involved a complaint that the court had ordered Joel A. Horta Suarez to amend within 60 days. The court had warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal.
The order was mailed to Horta Suarez’s listed address, but the mail was returned as undeliverable. Horta Suarez did not file an amended complaint, update his address, or communicate with the court.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim under the federal law governing screening of fee-waived cases. She also terminated all pending motions and denied fee-waived status for any appeal, after finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Horta Suarez v. Internal Revenue Service · No. 1:21-cv-10879
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 7, 2022
Background
Joel A. Horta Suarez submitted a filing styled as a “petition.” The court treated it as a complaint for purposes of its earlier order. On January 31, 2022, the court ordered Horta Suarez to file an amended complaint within 60 days and stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal.
The court mailed that order to the address listed in the complaint. On March 10, 2022, the mailing was returned as undeliverable and unable to be forwarded. Horta Suarez did not file an amended complaint, update his address, or otherwise communicate with the court.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), which requires dismissal of certain claims filed by people proceeding without paying the filing fee when the claims fail to state a claim. The opinion does not describe the underlying allegations or explain why the original complaint failed to state a claim beyond noting Horta Suarez’s failure to comply with the order to amend.
The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all pending motions. 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-waived status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.