Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 28, 2022

Wood v. VIACOMCBS/PARAMOUNT

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-06323
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Chadd Wood v. VIACOMCBS/PARAMOUNT, Judge Swain ordered Wood to pay filing fees or submit a complete financial application within 30 days.

Who this affects

Chadd Wood, who must either pay the $402 in fees or submit a complete amended application to proceed without prepaying fees within 30 days.

What happened

Chadd Wood v. VIACOMCBS/PARAMOUNT concerns Wood’s request to proceed without paying court fees. Wood is representing himself and submitted an application asking to proceed without paying the fees in advance.

The court found that Wood had not fully answered questions about his current finances. Although he reported no wages, income, or money in the bank, he listed $4,050 in monthly expenses and debts totaling $15,000 without explaining how he pays those expenses. The court therefore could not decide whether he qualified to proceed without prepaying fees.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered Wood, within 30 days, either to pay $402 in fees or submit a complete amended application. No summons will issue for now, and the action will be dismissed if Wood does not comply. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Wood v. VIACOMCBS/PARAMOUNT · No. 1:22-cv-06323
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 28, 2022

Background

Chadd Wood brought the action without a lawyer. To begin a civil case in the Southern District of New York, a plaintiff must either pay $402 in fees or submit a signed application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning without paying the fees in advance. Wood submitted an IFP application.

The Court’s Analysis

The court said Wood’s application did not fully answer questions about his current financial situation. Wood indicated that his employment-related answers suggested no employment, reported gross monthly wages and take-home pay of $0.00, reported no income from the listed sources during the previous 12 months, and stated that he had no money in the bank. He did not answer one question about his finances. He listed monthly expenses totaling $4,050, along with $5,000 in credit-card debt and $10,000 in loans, but did not identify to whom the debts were payable.

Because Wood did not provide enough information about his income and how he pays his expenses, the court could not determine whether he had enough money to pay the filing fees. The court therefore did not make a ruling on his IFP application at this stage.

Order

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered Wood to do one of two things within 30 days of the order: pay the $402 in fees or submit an amended IFP application. The amended application must answer all questions about his current financial situation, address the deficiencies identified by the court, and use docket number 22-CV-6323 (LTS). If the court grants the amended application, Wood may proceed without prepaying the fees.

No summons will issue at this time. If Wood complies, the case will be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If he does not comply within the allowed time, the action will be dismissed. The court also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.