Laforest v. Doe

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedJune 3, 2025
Docket1:25-cv-03719
StatusUnknown

This text of Laforest v. Doe (Laforest v. Doe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Laforest v. Doe, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JEAN PIERRE LAFOREST, Plaintiff, 25-CV-3719 (LTS) -against- ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATION JOHN DOE SECURITY GUARD, ET AL., AND ORIGINAL SIGNAURE Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this action pro se. To proceed with a civil action in this Court, a plaintiff must either pay $405.00 in fees – a $350.00 filing fee plus a $55.00 administrative fee – or, to request authorization to proceed without prepayment of fees, submit a signed IFP application. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915. Plaintiff did not use the Court’s IFP application, and the document he submitted does not contain all the information that the Court needs to determine whether he is unable to pay the fees. Within thirty days of the date of this order, Plaintiff must either pay the $405.00 in fees or submit the attached IFP application. If Plaintiff submits the IFP application, it should be labeled with docket number 25-CV-3719. If the Court grants the IFP application, Plaintiff will be permitted to proceed without prepayment of fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). In addition, Plaintiff submitted the complaint without a signature. Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s name – or by a party

personally if the party is unrepresented.” See also Local Civil Rule 11.1(a). The Supreme Court has interpreted Rule 11(a) to require “as it did in John Hancock’s day, a name handwritten (or a mark handplaced).” Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 764 (2001). Plaintiff is directed to submit the attached signature page for the complaint with an original signature to the Court within thirty days of the date of this order. No summons shall issue at this time. If Plaintiff complies with this order, the case shall be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk’s Office. If Plaintiff fails to comply

with this order within the time allowed, the action will be dismissed. The Court certifies under 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. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444–45 (1962) (holding that appellant demonstrates good faith when seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Dated: June 3, 2025 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Becker v. Montgomery
532 U.S. 757 (Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Laforest v. Doe, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laforest-v-doe-nysd-2025.