DeBlasio v. City of New York
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-05266
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In DeBlasio v. City of New York, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice because the incarcerated plaintiff had three prior strikes and showed no imminent danger.
The ruling affects Philip Ernest DeBlasio’s ability to proceed without paying filing fees while he is in custody. His complaint against the City of New York was dismissed without prejudice, and he may pursue a new civil-rights action by paying the filing fees, subject to required screening.
What happened
In DeBlasio v. City of New York, Philip Ernest DeBlasio sued the City of New York while incarcerated and proceeding without a lawyer. He had not paid the filing fee or formally requested permission to proceed without paying it.
The court treated him as seeking permission to proceed without paying. It found that he was barred by the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s “three-strikes” rule because four earlier cases or appeals had been dismissed as frivolous or for failing to state a claim. The court also found that he had not shown an imminent danger of serious physical injury.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The court said DeBlasio could bring a new civil-rights action by paying the filing fees, but he remains barred from proceeding without paying fees while in custody unless he faces an imminent threat of serious physical injury. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying fees.
The detailed version
- DeBlasio v. City of New York · No. 1:25-cv-05266
- Laura Swain
- July 2, 2025
Background
Philip Ernest DeBlasio brought this action against the City of New York while incarcerated at Cheshire Correctional Institution. He proceeded without a lawyer. He had neither paid the filing fees nor requested permission to proceed without prepaying them, a status commonly called proceeding without paying fees.
The court assumed that DeBlasio sought that status and applied the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s “three-strikes” rule, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That rule generally prevents an incarcerated person from bringing a civil action without prepaying fees if the person previously had at least three cases or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim, unless the person faced an imminent danger of serious physical injury.
Reason for Dismissal
The court relied on an earlier round of DeBlasio’s litigation in this court, in which the court identified four qualifying dismissals and revoked his permission to proceed without paying fees. The opinion also identifies three earlier cases dismissed for failure to state a claim and an earlier appeal dismissed as frivolous.
The court concluded that DeBlasio could not proceed without paying the filing fee because he had three or more qualifying prior dismissals. It also found that he had not shown an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The opinion states that an imminent danger must exist when the complaint is filed.
Disposition
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes rule. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The court stated that DeBlasio may pursue relief in a civil-rights action by paying the filing fees, after which the complaint would be screened under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
DeBlasio remains barred from proceeding without paying fees in future actions while he is in custody unless he is under an imminent threat of serious physical injury.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.