Alexander v. Department of Homeless Services
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-10160
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Alexander v. Department of Homeless Services, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Sean Finnegan allegedly filed it under another name while barred from fee-free filing.
The action captioned as brought by Liam Alexander was dismissed without prejudice. The ruling also applied the court’s filing restriction to Sean Finnegan as the person the court concluded had brought the action, while allowing a 14-day opportunity to show that Liam Alexander was the actual plaintiff.
What happened
In Alexander v. Department of Homeless Services, the court said the action appeared to have been filed by Sean Finnegan even though it named Liam Alexander as the plaintiff. The court relied on the address, handwriting, signature, and claims about stolen property in the complaint.
Because Finnegan was barred from proceeding without paying filing fees unless he first obtained court permission, and he had not sought that permission, the court dismissed the action without prejudice under the earlier bar order. The plaintiff may ask to reopen the case within 14 days by providing identification or other evidence that Liam Alexander—not Sean Finnegan—is the plaintiff.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Alexander v. Department of Homeless Services · No. 1:22-cv-10160
- Laura Swain
- Dec. 8, 2022
Background
The court stated that it had received multiple actions purportedly brought by “Liam Alexander” that appeared actually to have been filed by Sean Finnegan. The court had previously barred Finnegan from proceeding without paying filing fees unless he obtained permission to file a new action.
The court had earlier identified similar indicators in another action: the complaint used an address Finnegan had provided in recent cases, and the handwriting and signature appeared to match Finnegan’s. The court also noted that Alexander and Finnegan had filed similar suits based on the same facts in different federal district courts. A related action was dismissed without prejudice after the plaintiff did not respond to an order requiring an explanation of who had filed it.
Court’s analysis
The court determined that this action had similar indicators. The complaint used Finnegan’s address, contained his distinctive handwriting and signature, and asserted claims about stolen property similar to claims Finnegan had repeatedly brought. The court therefore concluded that Sean Finnegan appeared to have brought the action under the name Liam Alexander.
Because Finnegan sought to proceed without paying filing fees but had not applied for permission required by the earlier prefiling injunction, the court dismissed the action under that bar order. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims about the alleged stolen property.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action without prejudice. It allowed the plaintiff to move within 14 days to reopen the action by submitting written identification or other evidence that Liam Alexander, rather than Sean Finnegan, was the plaintiff. The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.