Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 23, 2025

James v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-09614
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

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

Who this affects

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

What happened

In James v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center, the court had ordered Jaheim James to submit forms requesting permission to proceed without paying the filing fee and authorizing deductions from a prisoner account, or to pay the required $405 in fees. The court resent that order to James’s new address.

James did not submit the required forms or pay the fees by the deadline. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying fees and directed the clerk to enter judgment.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain issued the order on April 23, 2025. She certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, so permission to proceed without paying appeal fees was denied.

The detailed version

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

Case
James v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center · No. 1:24-cv-09614
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Apr. 23, 2025

Background

Jaheim James filed a complaint against Otis Bantum Correctional Center and other defendants. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

Filing Requirements

By an order dated December 12, 2024, the court directed James, 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 to file a civil action. The order stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal. On January 27, 2025, the court resent the December order to James’s new address.

Ruling

James did not submit the application and prisoner authorization or pay the required fees. The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

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.