Liner v. Hochul

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedJanuary 10, 2022
Docket1:21-cv-11116
StatusUnknown

This text of Liner v. Hochul (Liner v. Hochul) 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
Liner v. Hochul, (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JOSHUA LINER, Plaintiff, 1:21-CV-11116 (LTS) -against- ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEES OR IFP APPLICATION KATHY HOCHUL, GOV, et al., 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 $402.00 in fees – a $350.00 filing fee plus a $52.00 administrative fee – or, to request authorization to proceed without prepayment of fees, submit a signed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915. Plaintiff submitted the complaint without the fees or an IFP application. Within 30 days of the date of this order, Plaintiff must either pay the $402.00 in fees or complete, sign, and submit the attached IFP application. If Plaintiff submits the IFP application, it should be labeled with docket number 1:21-CV-11116 (LTS). If the Court grants the IFP application, Plaintiff will be permitted to proceed without prepayment of fees. See § 1915(a)(1). The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. No summons shall issue at this time. If Plaintiff complies with this order, this action 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, this 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: January 10, 2022 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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Liner v. Hochul, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/liner-v-hochul-nysd-2022.