Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 16, 2024

Blacknall v. City of White Plains

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:24-cv-06122
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Blacknall v. City of White Plains, Judge Swain ordered a prisoner to pay fees or authorize installments before the case could proceed.

Who this affects

DAFON S. BLACKNALL, an incarcerated plaintiff proceeding without a lawyer, must either pay the stated fees or submit the required prisoner authorization for the action to proceed.

What happened

In Blacknall v. City of White Plains, DAFON S. BLACKNALL filed a civil action without a lawyer and submitted an application to proceed without paying fees up front. The opinion says he was incarcerated and had not submitted the required authorization for deductions from his account.

The court gave Blacknall 30 days to either pay $405 in fees or submit the prisoner authorization. If he submits the authorization, the filing fee will be collected from his account in installments. The court said no summons would issue yet and warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal of the action.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The order did not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.

The detailed version

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

Case
Blacknall v. City of White Plains · No. 7:24-cv-06122
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Aug. 16, 2024

Background

DAFON S. BLACKNALL brought this civil action without a lawyer while incarcerated. He submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning to proceed without prepaying court fees, but he did not submit the separate prisoner authorization required by federal law.

The required payment or authorization

The order explains that a prisoner must either pay $405 to start a civil action or submit an IFP application and a prisoner authorization. The authorization permits the facility holding the prisoner to deduct the $350 filing fee from the prisoner’s account in installments and to provide the court with certified account statements for the prior six months. The $55 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted IFP status.

The court ordered Blacknall, within 30 days of August 16, 2024, to either pay the $405 in fees or complete and submit the attached prisoner authorization. If he submits the authorization, it must identify docket number 24-CV-6122 (LTS).

Effect on the case

No summons would issue at that time. If Blacknall complied, the Clerk’s Office would process the case under its procedures. If he failed to comply within the permitted period, the action would be dismissed. The order did not address the merits of Blacknall’s claims against the defendants.

Appeal-related ruling

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order also cautioned that certain dismissals of prisoner cases can count as strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), subject to the exception stated in that statute.

Judge and disposition

Judge Laura Taylor Swain issued an order directing Blacknall to provide the prisoner authorization or pay the required fees. This was a procedural order concerning filing requirements, not a decision on the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.