Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 20, 2025

McGriff v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-09654
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In McGriff v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice because McGriff neither paid filing fees nor submitted required forms.

Who this affects

Damon McGriff’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice because he did not submit the required application and prisoner authorization or pay the filing fees. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal.

What happened

McGriff v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center involved a complaint that the court had ordered Damon McGriff to support with required filing materials or payment.

The court had given McGriff 30 days to submit an application to proceed without paying the filing fee, a required prisoner authorization, or the $405 filing fee. He did none of these. The opinion also notes that the earlier order was returned as undeliverable.

The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice and directed the clerk to enter judgment. Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
McGriff v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center · No. 1:24-cv-09654
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Feb. 20, 2025

Background

The court’s December 20, 2024 order required Damon McGriff, within 30 days, either to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee and a prisoner authorization or to pay the $405 required filing fees. That order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal. The opinion states that McGriff did not submit the required application or authorization and did not pay the fees. It also states that the December order was returned as undeliverable.

Ruling

The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal did not bar a later filing based solely on this dismissal. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment.

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 permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. The opinion did not address the merits of the complaint.

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.