Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 14, 2025

Lee v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-09609
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Lee v. Otis Bantum Correctional Facility: Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Lee neither paid filing fees nor submitted required forms.

Who this affects

Norberto Lee’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and his request to proceed without paying fees on appeal was denied. The defendants were not required to litigate the underlying claims in this order.

What happened

In Lee v. Otis Bantum Correctional Facility, the court had previously ordered Norberto Lee to submit an application to proceed without paying filing fees, along with a required prisoner authorization, or to pay the $405 filing fee.

Lee did not submit the required documents or pay the fee within the ordered time. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling. The opinion does not address the underlying claims.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the clerk to enter judgment and denied Lee permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal, certifying 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
Lee v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center · No. 1:24-cv-09609
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Mar. 14, 2025

Background

On December 17, 2024, the Court ordered Norberto Lee to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee, together with prisoner authorization, within 30 days. Alternatively, Lee could pay the $405 in fees required to file a civil action. The order warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal.

Court’s ruling

Lee did not submit the application or prisoner authorization and did not pay the filing fees. The Court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The dismissal was based on Lee’s failure to satisfy the filing requirements; the Court did not decide the underlying claims.

The Court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. The Court also directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.

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.