Lastra v. Millennium Downtown New York Hotel
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-02603
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Lastra v. Millennium Downtown New York Hotel, Judge Swain ordered James Lastra to pay fees or submit an IFP application within 30 days.
James Lastra must either pay $405.00 or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees within 30 days; the case will be dismissed if he does not comply.
What happened
In Lastra v. Millennium Downtown New York Hotel, James Lastra filed the action without paying the required fees or submitting an application to proceed without prepaying them.
The court ordered Lastra, within 30 days, either to pay $405.00 in filing and administrative fees or to 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 certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for any appeal. The order did not address the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Lastra v. Millennium Downtown New York Hotel · No. 1:24-cv-02603
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 8, 2024
Background
James Lastra brought the action without a lawyer. He submitted the complaint without paying the required fees and without an application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an application to proceed in forma pauperis or IFP.
Order
The court explained that starting a civil action required either payment of $405.00—consisting of a $350.00 filing fee and a $55.00 administrative fee—or submission of a signed IFP application. The court gave Lastra 30 days from the date of the order to do one of those two things. If he submitted the application and the court granted it, he could proceed without prepaying the fees.
No summons would issue at that time. If Lastra 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.
Appeal Certification
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 IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.