Suh v. Dept. of Justice
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-07730
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Suh v. Dept. of Justice, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice after finding Young Yil Jo filed it for Andrew Suh.
Andrew Suh’s purported action was dismissed, while Young Yil Jo’s existing filing restrictions in the Southern District of New York remained in effect. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims against the Department of Justice.
What happened
In Suh v. Dept. of Justice, the court determined that the action was filed in Andrew Suh’s name but was actually filed by Young Yil Jo. The opinion says Suh was incarcerated and that the filing was described as a case brought without a lawyer.
The court noted that it had previously prohibited Jo from filing documents in another person’s name and from starting a new civil case in that court without permission. The opinion also states that the court had previously recognized Jo as filing cases in Suh’s name.
The court dismissed the action without prejudice to any future civil action Suh may bring. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also left Jo’s filing restrictions in place, denied permission to appeal without paying court fees, and directed the clerk to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Suh v. Dept. of Justice · No. 1:22-cv-07730
- Laura Swain
- Sept. 13, 2022
Background
The court received an action purportedly brought by Andrew Suh. The opinion states that Suh was incarcerated in the Dixon Correctional Center in Dixon, Illinois and that the action was filed without a lawyer. The court found that the action was actually filed by Young Yil Jo.
The court referred to two earlier orders that restricted Jo’s filings in the Southern District of New York. One order barred Jo from filing any document in that court in another person’s name. The other barred Jo from filing a new civil action or proceeding there without first obtaining the court’s permission. The court also cited earlier proceedings in which it had recognized Jo as bringing actions in Suh’s name.
Ruling
Because the court found that Jo filed this action, it dismissed the action without prejudice to any civil action Andrew Suh may wish to bring in the future. “Without prejudice” means that the dismissal itself does not bar Suh from bringing a future action.
The court advised Jo that the existing filing restrictions remained effective. Jo remains barred from filing a new civil action or proceeding in the court without first obtaining permission, and from filing any document there in another person’s name. The court stated that additional restrictions or sanctions could be imposed if Jo continued this conduct.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the required court fees. Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the clerk to enter judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.