Chen v. New York State
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-05966
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Chen v. New York State, Judge Swain denied permission to file, dismissed the action without prejudice, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Victor Chen’s new action was dismissed without prejudice after the court denied permission to file it. The court also denied him fee-free status for an appeal; the named defendants were not required to litigate the constitutional allegations in this action.
What happened
In Chen v. New York State, Victor Chen filed a new case against New York State, the New York Public Library, Harvard and Yale Universities, the United States, and other institutions. He alleged violations of his rights under the Fourth and Thirteenth Amendments.
Chen represented himself and asked to proceed without paying filing fees and to obtain permission to file the case. The court had previously barred him from filing new fee-free actions without first obtaining permission.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied permission to file and dismissed the action without prejudice. She also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Chen v. New York State · No. 1:22-cv-05966
- Laura Swain
- July 14, 2022
Background
Victor Chen filed this case without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fees. He also asked the court for permission to file because an earlier order had barred him from filing any new action without first obtaining that permission.
Chen’s complaint named New York State; the New York Public Library and other institutions to be identified; Harvard University’s Office of General Counsel; Yale University and its president, Peter Salovey; and the United States and Attorney General Merrick Garland. He alleged that the defendants violated his constitutional rights under the Fourth and Thirteenth Amendments.
Court’s Ruling
The court stated that the case continued Chen’s pattern of filings that it characterized as vexatious and frivolous. The court denied his motion for permission to file and dismissed the action without prejudice, meaning the dismissal itself did not bar refiling. The opinion did not decide whether the alleged constitutional violations occurred.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Chen permission to pursue an appeal without paying filing fees.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.