Emrit v. Special Agent in Charge of FBI Field Office in Southern District of…
Emrit v. Special Agent in Charge of FBI Field Office in Southern District of New York (SDNY)
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-09832
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Emrit v. Special Agent in Charge, Chief Judge Swain denied a motion as moot and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.
Ronald Satish Emrit, whose motion was denied as moot and whose permission to appeal without paying court fees was denied.
What happened
In Emrit v. Special Agent in Charge of FBI Field Office in Southern District of New York (SDNY), the court had already dismissed Ronald Satish Emrit’s action without prejudice because he did not obtain required permission before filing without paying court fees. The court entered judgment the next day.
After the case closed, Emrit filed a “Second Motion In Limine” seeking to introduce evidence in litigation in North Carolina and Florida. Because the case was closed and he gave no reason to disturb the earlier dismissal and judgment, the court denied the motion as moot.
Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain also found that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Emrit permission to appeal without paying court fees.
The detailed version
- Emrit v. Special Agent in Charge of FBI Field Office in Southern District of… · No. 1:22-cv-09832
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 3, 2023
Background
On December 1, 2022, the Court dismissed Ronald Satish Emrit’s action without prejudice because he had not complied with a May 16, 2014, order barring him from filing a new action in this court without paying court fees unless he first obtained the court’s permission. The Court entered judgment on December 2, 2022.
Motion
On December 20, 2022, the Court received Emrit’s “Second Motion In Limine,” which sought to have evidence entered in litigation in North Carolina and Florida. The opinion states that the case was closed and that Emrit suggested no basis for disturbing the December 1 dismissal and civil judgment.
Ruling
The Court denied the motion as moot, meaning that it would not decide the motion because the closed case provided no live matter for the requested relief. The Court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.