Brown v. The Gente that have an unusual advantage of Tele
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-07137
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brown v. The “Gente” That Have an Unusual Advantage of Tele, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice because plaintiffs neither paid filing fees nor supplied required signatures.
Yariel D. Brown, MPA/PHD {2020}, Coco III, and Zaza were affected: their complaint was dismissed without prejudice because they did not pay the filing fees or submit the required fee-waiver applications, and Coco III and Zaza did not provide original signatures. Permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal was also denied.
What happened
In Brown v. The “Gente” That Have an Unusual Advantage of Tele, the court had ordered the plaintiffs to submit applications to waive the filing fees or pay the required fees. It also ordered Coco III and Zaza to submit original signatures.
The plaintiffs did not submit the fee-waiver applications, pay the filing fees, or provide the required original signatures. The court had warned that failing to comply would lead to dismissal. The opinion also states that an earlier order was returned because of an insufficient address, and the plaintiffs did not provide an updated address or contact the court further.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. She also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal after certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Brown v. The Gente that have an unusual advantage of Tele · No. 1:22-cv-07137
- Laura Swain
- Sept. 28, 2022
Background
On August 24, 2022, the court ordered each plaintiff to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the $402 required to file a civil action. The court separately ordered Coco III and Zaza to resubmit the complaint’s signature page with original signatures. The order warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal.
The plaintiffs did not submit applications to waive the filing fee or pay the fees. Coco III and Zaza also did not submit original signatures. The opinion states that the August 24 order was returned to the court on September 6, 2022, marked “Return To Sender Insufficient Address Unable to Forward, RTS.” The plaintiffs did not provide an updated address or have further contact with the court.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court dismissed the case for failure to satisfy filing-fee and signature requirements without deciding the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.