Lithgow v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision
Bismark Lithgow, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, et al.
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-04249
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bismark Lithgow v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Judge Swain transferred the filing to Clarkson and closed this action.
Bismark Lithgow and the other people he sought to represent; the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision; and the separate Clarkson consent-decree proceeding.
What happened
In Bismark Lithgow v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Bismark Lithgow, representing himself, submitted a filing alleging violations of a consent decree concerning deaf incarcerated people in the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision.
Because Lithgow said the filing concerned alleged violations of the consent decree in Clarkson v. Goord, the court directed the Clerk to file it as a “Verified Formal Complaint” in that earlier case. The court also directed the Clerk to close this action.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal. The order did not decide whether the consent decree was violated.
The detailed version
- Lithgow v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision · No. 1:25-cv-04249
- Laura Swain
- Sept. 16, 2025
Background
Bismark Lithgow, proceeding without a lawyer, filed an application titled “Verified Formal Complaint ‘Consent Decree Violation.’” He alleged a violation of the consent decree entered in Clarkson v. Goord, which concerns the treatment of deaf incarcerated individuals held by the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision.
Lithgow’s filing requested that the ombudsman associated with the Clarkson consent decree act on the alleged violations before individual and class-action complaints and consent-decree violations were filed.
Court’s Action
The court concluded that, because the filing concerned alleged violations of the Clarkson consent decree, it should be filed in the Clarkson case. The Clerk of Court was directed to file the complaint from this action as a “Verified Formal Complaint” in Clarkson. The Clerk was also directed to close this action, No. 25-CV-4249 (LTS).
Appeal-Fee Determination
The court 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 proceed without paying filing fees for purposes of an appeal.
What the Order Did Not Decide
The order did not determine whether the consent decree was violated, whether Lithgow’s allegations were valid, or whether any individual or class claim should proceed.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.