Moshir v. NYC Mayor
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-08003
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In AL MOSHIR v. NYC MAYOR, Judge Swain ordered payment or an IFP application before the case could proceed.
Al Moshir was required to pay the fees or submit an IFP application within 30 days for the action to proceed. The defendants were not affected by service at this stage because no summons issued.
What happened
In AL MOSHIR v. NYC MAYOR, Al Moshir filed a civil action without paying the required fees or submitting an application to proceed without prepaying them.
The court gave Moshir 30 days to pay $402 or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees. No summons would issue at that time, and the action would be dismissed if he did not comply.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Moshir v. NYC Mayor · No. 1:23-cv-08003
- Laura Swain
- Sept. 14, 2023
Background
Al Moshir brought this civil action without a lawyer. The opinion does not describe the claims. He submitted the complaint without paying the required filing and administrative fees and without an application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.
Order
The court ordered Moshir, within 30 days of the order, either to pay $402 in fees or submit a signed IFP application. The $402 consists of a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee. If the court grants the IFP application, Moshir may proceed without paying the fees in advance.
No summons would issue at that time. If Moshir complied, the Clerk’s Office would process the case under its procedures. If he failed to comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed. Because Moshir did not provide the court with a physical or email address, the Clerk of Court could not send him the order; the Clerk was directed to provide a copy if he appeared at the courthouse.
Ruling
Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. This order addressed the case’s filing-fee and prepayment requirements; it did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.