Bailey v. Doe
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-02257
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Bailey v. Doe, Chief Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice after Bailey neither paid filing fees nor submitted required forms.
Trevor Bailey's complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and he was denied permission to appeal without paying fees.
What happened
In Bailey v. Doe, the court had ordered Trevor Bailey to submit forms requesting permission to proceed without paying filing fees and authorizing required deductions, or to pay the $405 filing fee. The order warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal.
Bailey did not submit the forms or pay the fee. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not permanently bar the case under the terms stated in the order.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees. She directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Bailey v. Doe · No. 1:25-cv-02257
- Laura Swain
- June 3, 2025
Background
On March 25, 2025, the court ordered Trevor Bailey to do one of two things within 30 days: submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee and a required prisoner authorization, or pay the $405 required to file a civil action in the court. The order stated that failing to comply would result in dismissal.
Ruling
The court found that Bailey had neither submitted the application and prisoner authorization nor paid the filing fee. It 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 any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying fees. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
Effect
The order ended this case at the filing stage because Bailey did not satisfy the court's filing-fee or required-form requirements. The dismissal was without prejudice, as stated by the court.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.