Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 4, 2025

Hogue v. COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL AND COMMUNITY…

Full caption

WILLIAM HOGUE v. COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (DOCCS) ET AL […]

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
7:25-cv-07275
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In William Hogue v. Commissioner, Judge Swain ordered a corrected prisoner authorization or $405 payment within 30 days before the case could proceed.

Who this affects

William Hogue, an incarcerated plaintiff representing himself, must either pay the required fees or submit a corrected authorization allowing collection of the full filing fee. The case will be dismissed if he does not comply within 30 days.

What happened

William Hogue v. Commissioner of the Department of Correctional and Community Supervision concerns the filing requirements for Hogue’s federal civil action. Hogue is incarcerated and is representing himself.

Hogue submitted an application to avoid paying fees up front and an authorization for deductions from his prison account, but the authorization covered only $150 of the required $350 filing fee. The court gave him 30 days to pay $405 in fees or submit a corrected authorization covering the full $350 filing fee.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered that no summons issue yet and said the case would be processed if Hogue complied. She also stated that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hogue v. COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL AND COMMUNITY… · No. 7:25-cv-07275
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Sept. 4, 2025

Background

William Hogue, who the opinion says is incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, filed this civil action without a lawyer. To proceed, a prisoner must either pay the $350 filing fee and $55 administrative fee, for a total of $405, or submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees and a prisoner authorization.

Hogue submitted both an application to proceed without prepaying fees and a prisoner authorization. The authorization, however, allowed deductions of only $150 from his prison account, rather than the full $350 filing fee required from a prisoner even when the court permits payment without prepayment.

Court’s order

The court ordered Hogue, within 30 days of September 4, 2025, to do one of two things: pay the full $405 in fees or complete and submit the attached prisoner authorization allowing collection of the full $350 filing fee. The authorization was to identify docket number 25-CV-7275 (LTS).

No summons would issue at that time. The court stated that, if Hogue complied, the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If he did not comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed. The court also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

Classification and significance

This was a procedural order addressing filing-fee and prisoner-authorization requirements. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims in Hogue’s civil action. It also cautioned that certain future dismissals of prisoner cases can count as “strikes” under the federal prisoner-litigation statute, but this order did not state that Hogue’s action had received a strike.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.