Leon v. Town Board of the Town of Ramapo
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-03965
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Leon v. Town Board, Chief Judge Swain ordered payment or a corrected fee-waiver request and an original signature within 30 days.
Vladimir Leon, who was required to correct his fee-waiver application and provide an original signature before the action could proceed; the pending action against the Town Board of the Town of Ramapo and the East Ramapo Schools District of Education was also affected.
What happened
In Leon v. Town Board of the Town of Ramapo, Vladimir Leon, representing himself, submitted a fee-waiver application instead of paying the $402 filing and administrative fees. The court found that his application did not provide enough information about his gross monthly pay or wages to show that he could not pay.
The court also found that Leon’s complaint was unsigned. It ordered him, within 30 days, either to pay the fees or submit an amended fee-waiver application, and to resubmit the complaint’s signature page with an original signature. No summons would issue at that time.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain stated that the case would be processed if Leon complied, but would be dismissed if he did not comply within the allowed time. The court also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Leon v. Town Board of the Town of Ramapo · No. 1:22-cv-03965
- Laura Swain
- May 18, 2022
Background
Vladimir Leon brought this action against the Town Board of the Town of Ramapo and the East Ramapo Schools District of Education while representing himself. To proceed without paying court fees in advance, a plaintiff may request permission to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning without prepaying the filing fees. Leon submitted an IFP application, but stated that he was self-employed at a family bakery without stating his gross monthly pay or wages. The court therefore could not determine from the application that he was unable to pay the required $402 in filing and administrative fees.
Leon also submitted an unsigned complaint. The court explained that a person representing himself must personally sign a pleading, and that an emailed filing may use a handwritten signature, a digital signature, or the typed format "/s/Filer’s Name." Leon had not used any of those methods.
Order
The court ordered Leon, within 30 days of May 18, 2022, either to pay the $402 in fees or submit an amended IFP application. The amended application must state his gross monthly pay or wages and provide facts showing that he cannot pay the fees. The court also ordered him to resubmit the complaint’s signature page with an original signature. If the court grants the amended IFP application, Leon may proceed without prepaying the fees.
No summons would issue at that time. The court stated that the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures if Leon complied with the order, and that the action would be dismissed if he failed to comply within the permitted time. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addresses fee payment, an IFP application, and a signature requirement without deciding the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.