Nunez v. Fraser
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-00625
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Nunez v. Fraser, Judge Swain granted Nunez an extension to amend but denied IFP status for an appeal.
Javier Nunez received more time to amend his complaint, but he was denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal. The case remained subject to possible dismissal if he did not comply with the amendment order.
What happened
In Nunez v. Fraser, Javier Nunez was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. The court had previously ordered him to correct problems in his complaint, but his amended complaint was substantially similar and had the same problems.
The court gave Nunez more time to file another amended complaint that follows the earlier order. The court warned that the case will be dismissed for failure to state a claim if he does not comply and cannot show a good reason for not doing so.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Nunez permission to proceed without paying the appeal-related filing fee. The order did not dismiss the case at this stage.
The detailed version
- Nunez v. Fraser · No. 1:23-cv-00625
- Laura Swain
- May 17, 2023
Background
Javier Nunez was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. On April 17, 2023, the court directed him to amend his original complaint to address deficiencies. Nunez filed an amended complaint that same day.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that the amended complaint was substantially similar to the original complaint and was deficient for the same reasons. The opinion does not describe the specific deficiencies.
Ruling
The court granted Nunez an extension of time to file an amended complaint that complies with the April 17 order. The court stated that if Nunez fails to comply within the permitted time and cannot show good cause for that failure, the action will be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
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 Nunez permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal. The order did not dismiss the action or decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.