Frost v. NYPD
Frost v. NYPD
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK YVONNE FROST, Plaintiff, -against- 20-CV-0069 (CM) NYPD; NYC MTA; CITY OF NEW YORK ORDER OF DISMISSAL (HRA); CVR ASSOCIATES INC.; UNITED UNDER
28 U.S.C. § 1651STATES SD COURT; BRONX SUPREME COURT, Defendants. COLLEEN McMAHON, Chief United States District Judge: In an order dated November 7, 2019, and entered the next day, the Court barred Plaintiff from filing any new federal civil action in forma pauperis (IFP) without first obtaining from the Court leave to file. See Frost v. City of New York (HRA), ECF 1:19-CV-8936, 6 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 7, 2019). Plaintiff files this new pro se action, seeks IFP status, and has not sought leave from the Court. The Court therefore dismisses this action without prejudice for Plaintiffs failure to comply with the November 7, 2019 order. The Clerk of Court is directed to transmit a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket.! The Court certifies, pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States,
369 U.S. 438, 444-45(1962). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 6, 2020 , New York, New York huh. Wyk Chief United States District Judge
' Plaintiff has consented to receive electronic service of Court filings. (ECF No. 3.)
Reference
- Status
- Unknown