Baker v. GVS Properties
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-03745
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Baker v. GVS Properties, Judge Swain ordered Eric T. Baker to pay fees or submit an IFP application within 30 days.
Eric T. Baker must either pay the required fees or submit an IFP application within 30 days for the action to proceed; the opinion states that the action will be dismissed if he does not comply.
What happened
In Baker v. GVS Properties, Eric T. Baker filed a civil action without paying the required fees or submitting an application to proceed without prepaying them.
The court ordered Baker, who was representing himself, to pay $402 or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees within 30 days. The court said no summons would issue at that time.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain stated that the case would be processed if Baker complied and would be dismissed if he did not. She also denied fee-free status for any appeal from the order.
The detailed version
- Baker v. GVS Properties · No. 1:22-cv-03745
- Laura Swain
- May 11, 2022
Background
Eric T. Baker brought the action without a lawyer. The opinion states that a person starting a civil action in the court must either pay $402 in fees—$350 for filing and $52 in administrative fees—or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). Baker submitted the complaint without either the fees or an IFP application.
Order
The court ordered Baker, within 30 days of the order, either to pay the $402 or submit the attached signed IFP application labeled with the case number. If the court grants the application, Baker may proceed without prepaying fees. No summons would issue at that time. The court stated that the action would be dismissed if Baker did not comply within the permitted period.
Appeal and effect
Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order addressed filing-fee and case-processing requirements; it did not decide the underlying claims against GVS Properties.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.