Waterman v. Fourth Lenox Terrace Associates LLC

S.D. New York

Waterman v. Fourth Lenox Terrace Associates LLC

DecidedJuly 30, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-06151

StatusUnknown

This text of Waterman v. Fourth Lenox Terrace Associates LLC (Waterman v. Fourth Lenox Terrace Associates LLC) 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

Waterman v. Fourth Lenox Terrace Associates LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RORY WATERMAN; MARNIQUA TOMPKINS, Plaintiffs, 25-CV-6151 (LTS) -against- ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATION FOURTH LENOX TERRACE ASSOCIATES LLC, Defendant. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiffs, who are appearing pro se, bring this action seeking emergency relief. To proceed with a civil action in this court, a plaintiff must either (1) pay $405.00 in fees – a $350.00 filing fee plus a $55.00 administrative fee – or (2) request authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees, by submitting signed IFP applications. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915. Plaintiffs filed their complaint by emailing it to the Court’s designated email address for filing a new case by email. Plaintiffs did not, however, each submit a completed and signed IFP application or indicate that they intended to pay the fees. Thus, within 30 days of the date of this order, Plaintiffs must pay the $405.00 fees, or they must each complete and submit the attached IFP applications. A ruling on Plaintiffs’ motion seeking preliminary injunctive relief will issue after Plaintiffs pay the fees or the Court grants their applications to proceed IFP. No summons shall issue at this time. If Plaintiffs comply with this order, the case shall be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk’s Office. If Plaintiffs fail 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: July 30, 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RORY WATERMAN; MARNIQUA TOMPKINS, Plaintiffs, 25-CV-6151 (LTS) -against- ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATION FOURTH LENOX TERRACE ASSOCIATES LLC, Defendant. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiffs, who are appearing pro se, bring this action seeking emergency relief. To proceed with a civil action in this court, a plaintiff must either (1) pay $405.00 in fees – a $350.00 filing fee plus a $55.00 administrative fee – or (2) request authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees, by submitting signed IFP applications. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915. Plaintiffs filed their complaint by emailing it to the Court’s designated email address for filing a new case by email. Plaintiffs did not, however, each submit a completed and signed IFP application or indicate that they intended to pay the fees. Thus, within 30 days of the date of this order, Plaintiffs must pay the $405.00 fees, or they must each complete and submit the attached IFP applications. A ruling on Plaintiffs’ motion seeking preliminary injunctive relief will issue after Plaintiffs pay the fees or the Court grants their applications to proceed IFP. No summons shall issue at this time. If Plaintiffs comply with this order, the case shall be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk’s Office. If Plaintiffs fail 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: July 30, 2025 New York, New York

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Waterman v. Fourth Lenox Terrace Associates LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waterman-v-fourth-lenox-terrace-associates-llc-nysd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack