Williams v. City of New York
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-10807
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Williams v. City of New York, Judge Swain ordered a signature page within 30 days or the action would be dismissed.
Norbert S. Williams, III, whose unsigned complaint was subject to the signature-page requirement; the action would be dismissed if he did not comply.
What happened
In Williams v. City of New York, Norbert S. Williams, III filed the case without a lawyer, but his complaint did not include a signature page. The court explained that an unrepresented party must personally sign a complaint.
The court ordered Williams to submit the missing signature page within 30 days of the order. No summons would issue while the signature was missing.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain stated that the case would be processed by the Clerk’s Office if Williams complied, but the action would be dismissed if he did not. She also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Williams v. City of New York · No. 1:23-cv-10807
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 2, 2024
Background
Norbert S. Williams, III brought the action without a lawyer. He submitted a complaint that was missing its signature page. The court cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) and Local Civil Rule 11.1(a), which require an unrepresented party to sign a pleading personally. The court explained that the required signature must be handwritten or a mark placed by hand.
Order
The court directed Williams to submit the signature page within 30 days of January 2, 2024. A copy of the signature page was attached to the order. No summons would issue at that time. If Williams complied, the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If he failed to comply within the allowed period, the action would be dismissed.
Appeal and filing-fee ruling
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without prepaying the filing fees. The attached certification form also warned about requirements concerning prisoner litigation, administrative exhaustion for prison-condition claims, current-address information, and signatures, but the order itself did not decide those issues.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.