Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 27, 2022

EMRIT v. SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE OF FBI FIELD OFFICE IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF…

Full caption

EMRIT v. SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE OF FBI FIELD OFFICE IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK (SDNY)

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-10804
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Emrit v. Special Agent, Chief Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Emrit had not sought permission required for fee-free filing.

Who this affects

Ronald Satish Emrit; the court dismissed his action without prejudice and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

What happened

In Ronald Satish Emrit v. Special Agent in Charge of FBI Field Office in Southern District of New York (SDNY), Ronald Satish Emrit filed a civil action without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying filing fees. A 2014 order had barred him from filing new civil actions in that court without first obtaining permission.

The court dismissed the action without prejudice because Emrit had not sought the required permission. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment dismissing the action.

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Emrit permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
EMRIT v. SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE OF FBI FIELD OFFICE IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF… · No. 1:22-cv-10804
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Dec. 27, 2022

Background

Ronald Satish Emrit filed this civil action without a lawyer and sought permission to proceed without paying filing fees. The opinion states that a May 16, 2014 order barred him from filing any new civil action in the Southern District of New York without first obtaining the court’s permission.

The opinion also states that this action was originally filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and transferred to the Southern District of New York. The court noted that the complaint was nearly identical to complaints in two earlier related proceedings, both of which had been dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1651.

Ruling

Because Emrit had not sought permission before filing, the court dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to comply with the 2014 order. Section 1651 is a federal statute that gives courts authority to issue orders needed to protect their proceedings. The court did not address the underlying claims or allegations.

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment dismissing the action.

Effect

The dismissal was without prejudice. The opinion does not explain the underlying claims or otherwise decide their merits.

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.