Hecht v. Brandt
- James Cott
- 1:23-cv-06279
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Hecht v. Brandt: Judge Rochon ordered Brandt to pay $402 or seek fee-free status, or face dismissal of this action.
Heidi Brandt, whose removed action could not proceed unless she paid the filing fee or submitted the required application; Jerry Wells’s separate case was unaffected by this payment directive.
What happened
In Hecht v. Brandt, Heidi Brandt removed the case from New York state court but did not properly pay this case’s filing fee or submit an application to proceed without prepaying it. A $402 payment was instead applied to a separate case involving Jerry Wells.
The court ordered Brandt to pay the $402 fee or submit the required application by September 21, 2023. The case could not proceed until she complied. The court also said Brandt could request voluntary dismissal, which would not prevent refiling, and stated that failure to comply would lead to dismissal of this action without prejudice to the related case under docket number 23-CV-6276.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon also denied fee-free status for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Hecht v. Brandt · No. 1:23-cv-06279
- James Cott
- Sept. 11, 2023
Background
Heidi Brandt removed the action from New York Supreme Court, New York County, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Jerry Wells, the other state-court defendant, filed a separate notice of removal that was opened as a different civil action, No. 23-CV-6276.
The court had previously ordered Brandt either to pay the $402 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees. Brandt later wrote that she had sent one money order to pay the fee for herself and Wells. The payment was applied to Wells’s separate case, however, and not to this action.
Court’s Order
The court directed Brandt to comply with the earlier order by September 21, 2023. She had to either pay the $402 fee or submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees, labeled with this case’s docket number. The court explained that, if the application were granted, Brandt could proceed without prepaying the filing fee. Until Brandt complied, this action could not proceed.
The court stated that if Brandt failed to comply by the deadline, this action would be dismissed without prejudice to the matter pending under docket number 23-CV-6276. The court also noted that Brandt could request voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; that dismissal would also be without prejudice.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.