Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 11, 2020

Rusielewicz v. N.Y.S. Dept of Corrections and Community Supervision

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:19-cv-10272
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureSection 1983
In one sentence

In Rusielewicz v. N.Y.S. Dept of Corrections and Community Supervision, Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.

Who this affects

Anthony Rusielewicz's § 1983 claims and claims seeking release from custody were dismissed; his ability to appeal without prepaying the filing fee was also denied.

What happened

In Rusielewicz v. N.Y.S. Dept of Corrections and Community Supervision, the court had ordered Anthony Rusielewicz to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal, but he did not file one.

The court dismissed his claims under the federal civil-rights statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It also dismissed his claims seeking release from custody because he had not exhausted the required process. The opinion does not state that either dismissal was with or without prejudice.

Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Rusielewicz permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The clerk was directed to mail him the order and record service on the docket.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Rusielewicz v. N.Y.S. Dept of Corrections and Community Supervision · No. 1:19-cv-10272
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Feb. 11, 2020

Background

On December 10, 2019, the court ordered Anthony Rusielewicz to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order expressly stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal. Rusielewicz did not file an amended complaint. The complaint had been filed without prepaying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

Ruling

The court dismissed the claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Section 1983 provides a cause of action for certain violations of federal rights by state actors, but the opinion does not discuss the substance of those claims. The court separately dismissed the claims seeking release from custody for failure to exhaust. The opinion does not specify whether either dismissal was with or without prejudice.

Appeal and Case Administration

Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied permission to appeal without prepaying the filing fee. The clerk was directed to mail a copy of the order to Rusielewicz and record service on the docket.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.