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

Bell v. Intergen Health Management

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:22-cv-07338
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Bell v. Intergen Health Management, Chief Judge Swain treated the signed complaint as an amended complaint in the earlier case and administratively closed this action.

Who this affects

James Bell and Intergen Health Management; the signed complaint was moved into Bell’s earlier related proceeding, and this action was administratively closed.

What happened

In Bell v. Intergen Health Management, James Bell filed a signed complaint that was nearly identical to his unsigned complaint in an earlier related case. The court noted that Bell was representing himself in both actions.

Because the new complaint included Bell’s original signature, the court treated it as an amended complaint that complied with the earlier order requiring a signature page. The court directed the Clerk to file it in the earlier case instead of treating it as a separate action.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the Clerk to administratively close this case and denied Bell permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not address the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Bell v. Intergen Health Management · No. 1:22-cv-07338
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Oct. 28, 2022

Background

James Bell filed this action against Intergen Health Management on October 24, 2022. The complaint was virtually identical to a complaint Bell had filed in an earlier related proceeding. In that earlier proceeding, the court had ordered Bell to submit a signature page with his original signature because the complaint lacked one. Bell did not submit that signature page. The opinion states that Bell was representing himself in both proceedings.

Court’s action

Because the complaint in this action was signed, the court construed it as an amended complaint complying with the earlier signature-page order. The court directed the Clerk of Court to file the complaint from this action as an amended complaint in the earlier proceeding. It also directed the Clerk to administratively close this action and docket a copy of the order in the earlier proceeding.

Appeal-related ruling and effect

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order did not decide the merits of Bell’s claims against Intergen Health Management; it addressed how the signed complaint would be filed and closed this separate docket.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.