Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 24, 2022

Pettus v. Brrirr

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-08302
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Pettus v. Breir, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Pettus violated a prior filing restriction.

Who this affects

James Pettus’s action was dismissed without prejudice for failing to obtain the permission required by the 2005 order. The court also denied fee-free status for an appeal. The opinion did not resolve the claims against the defendants.

What happened

In Pettus v. Breir, James Pettus filed a new complaint and asked to proceed without paying filing fees. A 2005 court order barred him from filing any new fee-free action unless he first obtained the court’s permission.

The court dismissed the action without prejudice because Pettus had not sought that permission. It also denied fee-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.

The detailed version

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

Case
Pettus v. Brrirr · No. 1:22-cv-08302
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 24, 2022

Background

James Pettus filed a new complaint against the defendants and sought permission to proceed without paying filing fees. The court noted that, on February 4, 2005, Pettus had been barred from filing any new fee-free action unless he first obtained permission from the court. The opinion cites the earlier proceeding as Pettus v. Clarke, No. 05-CV-1439 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2005), and states that the appeal from that proceeding was dismissed.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action without prejudice because Pettus had not sought permission before filing the new complaint. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

Effect

The dismissal was based on Pettus’s failure to comply with the 2005 filing restriction, not on a decision about the underlying claims. Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.