Baker v. Pestana Park Avenue

Background

Eric Tymell Baker filed this action without a lawyer. In an earlier order dated December 5, 2022, the Court dismissed his federal-law claims for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted and declined to consider his state-law claims under its supplemental jurisdiction. The Court also referred to prior warnings about the consequences of continued meritless filings.

The earlier order required Baker to submit a declaration within 30 days explaining why the Court should not bar him from filing future civil actions in this court without paying filing fees, commonly called proceeding "in forma pauperis" or "IFP," unless he first obtained permission. The Court warned that failing to respond would result in the bar. Baker did not file the declaration.

Ruling

Relying on 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the Court barred Baker from filing any future civil action in the Southern District of New York IFP without first obtaining leave of court. To seek permission, he must attach his proposed complaint and a copy of the order to a motion filed with the court’s Pro Se Intake Unit. If he files a future civil action IFP without first filing that motion, the court will dismiss the action for violating the order.

The Court also warned that continued submission of frivolous documents could result in additional sanctions, including monetary penalties. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the Court certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for an appeal. The Court directed the Clerk to enter judgment reflecting both the December 5, 2022 dismissal and the filing injunction imposed in this order.

Classification

This is a procedural order because it imposes a filing restriction and addresses appeal-related fee status rather than deciding the merits of the underlying claims.