Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 25, 2023

Alexander v. Bravo

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-03373
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Alexander v. Bravo, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice under Finnegan’s filing bar.

Who this affects

The dismissal affected Liam Alexander’s action against Kervin Bravo, Wendy Israel, and Annette Acaidia. Sean Finnegan was affected by the court’s finding that he filed the action in Alexander’s name in violation of an earlier filing restriction. The court also denied fee-free appeal status.

What happened

In Alexander v. Bravo, the court found that Sean Finnegan filed the action using Liam Alexander’s name and requested permission to proceed without paying filing fees in Alexander’s name.

Finnegan was already barred from bringing a new action without paying fees unless the court allowed it. The court concluded that filing this action in Alexander’s name violated that earlier order.

Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice, denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal, and directed the clerk to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Alexander v. Bravo · No. 1:23-cv-03373
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Apr. 25, 2023

Background

The court stated that Sean Finnegan is barred from proceeding without paying filing fees in this court unless he first obtains the court’s permission. The court found that Finnegan filed this action in the name of Liam Alexander and signed an application seeking permission to proceed without paying filing fees that listed Alexander as the plaintiff.

The court said this was at least the eighth action Finnegan had filed in this district in Alexander’s name. The opinion described earlier related proceedings in which the court found that Finnegan had filed cases using Alexander’s name and dismissed those actions under the earlier filing bar or after Finnegan failed to respond to court orders. In one earlier proceeding, the court compared addresses, handwriting, and claims in reaching that finding.

Ruling

The court concluded that Finnegan had brought this action in Alexander’s name and had sought permission to proceed without paying filing fees in Alexander’s name. Because Finnegan did not comply with the earlier filing restriction, the court dismissed the action without prejudice under that order.

The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for purposes of an appeal. It directed the clerk to enter judgment. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims against Kervin Bravo, Wendy Israel, or Annette Acaidia.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.