Ezekwo v. Specialized Loan Servicing
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-10392
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Ezekwo v. Specialized Loan Servicing, Judge Swain barred future filings without permission after repeated frivolous cases and failure to respond.
Dr. Ifeoma Ezekwo is barred from filing future civil actions in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York without first obtaining the court's permission.
What happened
In Dr. Ifeoma Ezekwo v. Specialized Loan Servicing, the court said it had previously dismissed the action as frivolous and noted that Ezekwo had filed more than 25 cases dismissed as frivolous. The court ordered her to explain why it should not restrict her future filings, but she did not submit the required declaration.
The court barred Ezekwo from filing future civil actions in that court without first obtaining permission, whether or not she paid the filing fee. Any request for permission must include the proposed complaint and a copy of the order. The court warned that violations could lead to dismissal and that further frivolous filings could result in additional sanctions, including monetary penalties.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the clerk to close the action and enter judgment. She also denied permission to appeal without paying the costs because the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Ezekwo v. Specialized Loan Servicing · No. 1:23-cv-10392
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 1, 2024
Background
The opinion concerns a filing restriction under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, a federal law that allows courts to issue orders needed to manage cases and protect their proceedings. The court stated that it had dismissed the action on February 26, 2024, as frivolous. It also stated that Plaintiff had filed more than 25 cases in this and other courts that were dismissed as frivolous.
The court had ordered Plaintiff to submit a declaration within 30 days explaining why she should not be barred from filing further actions in the court without prior permission. The order would apply whether she paid the filing fee or sought permission to proceed without paying it. Plaintiff did not file the required declaration.
Ruling and Disposition
The court issued the bar order. Plaintiff may not file future civil actions in the court without first obtaining leave, meaning permission, from the court. A motion seeking permission must be filed with the court's Pro Se Intake Unit and must include both a copy of the proposed complaint and a copy of the bar order.
The court stated that any action filed without the required motion for permission will be dismissed for failure to comply with the order. It also warned that continued submission of frivolous documents may result in additional sanctions, including monetary penalties.
The clerk was directed to close the action and terminate any motions. The court 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 permission to appeal without paying the required costs. The clerk was also directed to enter judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.