Broussard v. United Nations
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-00121
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Broussard v. Mathias, Judge Swain said Broussard’s emailed documents would not be filed and warned she could lose electronic-filing permission.
Brooke Marie Broussard and Diplomate Infinite Light, LLC, whose electronically filed documents were at issue; the court’s filing procedures were also affected.
What happened
In Broussard v. Mathias, the court had allowed Brooke Marie Broussard to file documents electronically after she confirmed that she completed the required court course and understood the filing rules.
After that permission was granted, Broussard sent several documents to the judge’s chambers email instead of filing them electronically. The court said those documents would not be filed or considered.
Judge Swain warned that the court could cancel Broussard’s electronic-filing permission if she continued using chambers email. The court also denied fee-free appeal status after finding that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Broussard v. United Nations · No. 1:24-cv-00121
- Laura Swain
- Feb. 13, 2024
Background
The court had previously granted Plaintiff permission to file documents electronically. It relied on Plaintiff’s representation that she had completed the court’s electronic-filing introduction course and understood that she was required to file documents electronically rather than submit them to the Pro Se Intake Unit for scanning and docketing.
Court’s Action
After receiving several documents through the judge’s chambers email, the court stated that Plaintiff was required to submit documents electronically. The documents sent to chambers email would not be filed on the court’s electronic docket or addressed by the court. The court identified the Electronic Case Filing Help Desk as the source of assistance for electronic filing.
The court warned that, if Plaintiff continued sending documents to chambers email, it would vacate its earlier order granting permission to file documents electronically.
Appeal-Filing Status
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Disposition
The order did not decide the underlying claims. It addressed Plaintiff’s compliance with electronic-filing procedures, warned that her electronic-filing permission could be vacated, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.