Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 9, 2022

Moncion v. Stephen Sondheim Theater

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-01025
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Moncion v. Stephen Sondheim Theater, Judge Swain vacated the dismissal, reopened the case, and allowed an amended complaint within 60 days.

Who this affects

Betty M. Moncion, who must file an amended complaint within 60 days to avoid possible dismissal; Stephen Sondheim Theater does not have to answer yet.

What happened

Betty M. Moncion is representing herself and was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court had ordered her to amend her complaint, but the order was returned as undeliverable, and she did not update her address or contact the court. The court then dismissed the action on June 6, 2022; Moncion submitted a new address two days later.

The court vacated its June 6 order and judgment and directed the Clerk of Court to reopen the case and send Moncion the new order and the earlier amendment order. Moncion now has 60 days to file an amended complaint that follows the earlier instructions. The defendant does not have to respond yet.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered that failure to amend within 60 days, without a sufficient reason, will result in dismissal for failure to state a legally sufficient claim. The court also denied Moncion permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Moncion v. Stephen Sondheim Theater · No. 1:22-cv-01025
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 9, 2022

Background

Betty M. Moncion is proceeding without a lawyer and was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee. On March 25, 2022, the court ordered her to file an amended complaint addressing deficiencies in her original complaint. The order warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal.

The court mailed the March 25 order to Moncion, but the mailing was returned as undeliverable on April 6, 2022. Moncion did not update her address or otherwise communicate with the court before the court dismissed the action on June 6, 2022. On June 8, 2022, she submitted a change of address.

Ruling

The court vacated its June 6, 2022, order and judgment and directed the Clerk of Court to reopen the action. The Clerk must mail Moncion a copy of the June 9 order and the March 25 order at her new address.

The court granted Moncion 60 days to file an amended complaint complying with the March 25 order. The defendant was not required to file an answer at that time. The court stated that if Moncion fails to comply within the permitted period and cannot show good cause—a sufficient reason—for the failure, the action will be dismissed for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The court also stated that no further extensions of time will be granted.

Appeal-Fee Ruling

Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.