Sims v. Shapiro
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-02383
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Sims v. Shapiro, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Sims failed to obtain permission before filing a new fee-free case.
Nathaniel Sims, whose case was dismissed without prejudice because he did not obtain the required permission before filing without paying the filing fee; the opinion does not state how the dismissal affected Jack Shapiro or Cindy Katz beyond ending this action.
What happened
In Sims v. Shapiro, Nathaniel Sims filed a new case without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. A prior order barred him from filing any new fee-free case unless he first obtained the court’s permission, but he did not seek that permission.
The court had directed Sims to pay the filing fee or submit a completed and signed application to proceed without paying it. He submitted authorization from a prisoner but did not submit a completed application. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims against Jack Shapiro and Cindy Katz.
Judge Swain vacated the earlier order directing Sims to pay the fee or submit an application and dismissed the action without prejudice because Sims failed to comply with the prior order. The court also denied fee-free status for an appeal and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Sims v. Shapiro · No. 1:24-cv-02383
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 4, 2024
Background
Nathaniel Sims filed this case without a lawyer and sought permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. The opinion states that Sims was incarcerated at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center on Rikers Island. He filed the action with a prisoner authorization but without a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee.
A July 29, 2022 order had barred Sims from filing any new action without paying the filing fee unless he first obtained permission from the court. Sims did not seek that permission before filing this case.
Prior Court Order
On March 29, 2024, the court directed Sims either to pay the filing fees or to submit a completed and signed application to proceed without paying them. Because the earlier order required Sims to obtain permission before filing a new action without paying the filing fee, the court concluded that the March 29 order should be vacated.
Ruling
The court vacated its March 29, 2024 order. It dismissed the action without prejudice for Sims’s failure to comply with the July 29, 2022 order. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal did not bar refiling, although the opinion does not specify what steps would be required for any later filing.
The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Sims permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.