Yapi v. Adeyeye
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:24-cv-01757
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 12
In Yapi v. Adeyeye, Judge Ramos ordered pro se plaintiff to file a signed, corrected complaint within 30 days.
Christiane E. Yapi must file a signed amended complaint addressing jurisdiction and filing requirements within 30 days; Adenrele Adeyeye was not yet served according to this order.
What happened
In Christiane E. Yapi v. Adenrele Adeyeye, Christiane E. Yapi alleged that Adenrele Adeyeye sexually assaulted her. She filed the case without a lawyer and without paying filing fees, and attached documents that included sensitive information.
The court ordered Yapi to file an amended complaint. The replacement complaint must repeat the parties’ citizenship information needed for diversity jurisdiction, comply with privacy rules, and include her original signature. The court said no summons would issue yet and directed her to submit the amended complaint within 30 days.
Judge Edgardo Ramos stated that the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice if Yapi does not comply within the allowed time and cannot show good cause for the failure. The order did not decide whether the alleged sexual assault occurred or whether Yapi’s claims would succeed.
The detailed version
- Yapi v. Adeyeye · No. 1:24-cv-01757
- Edgardo Ramos
- May 20, 2024
Background
Christiane E. Yapi, proceeding without a lawyer and without paying filing fees, alleged that Adenrele Adeyeye sexually assaulted her. She used the court’s general complaint form and attached approximately 60 pages of documents, some of which contained sensitive material.
In an earlier order, the court explained that it was treating the allegations as state-law tort claims and that federal jurisdiction would therefore depend on diversity of citizenship. The court also told Yapi that the attached documents did not comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2, which limits certain personal information in publicly accessible court filings. The court directed her to file an amended complaint using an attached form.
Yapi then submitted an unsigned letter repeating the same general allegations. The letter did not state the citizenship of either party.
Court’s reasoning
The court explained that diversity jurisdiction requires the plaintiff and defendant to be citizens of different states. Yapi had identified herself in the original complaint as a citizen of New Jersey and Adeyeye as a citizen of New York, but the later letter omitted that information. Because the amended complaint would completely replace the original complaint rather than add to it, the court said Yapi must repeat any facts and claims she wants to keep, including the parties’ citizenship.
The court also held that Yapi’s letter did not satisfy the signature requirement in Rule 11(a). Because she was representing herself, documents she files must bear her personal signature, including an allowed electronic signature under the court’s filing rules.
Disposition
The court ordered Yapi to file an amended complaint within 30 days of the order’s date. The amended complaint must be labeled “Amended Complaint,” include docket number 24-CV-01757 (ER), address the required citizenship information, comply with Rule 5.2 if documents are attached, and be signed. No summons would issue at that time. If Yapi complied, the court would issue an order of service. If she failed to comply and could not show good cause, the complaint would be dismissed without prejudice. The order did not decide the merits of the sexual-assault allegations.
Read the full 12-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.