White v. Department of Corrections

Background

Robert White, who was held at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center on Rikers Island, filed this lawsuit without a lawyer. The complaint alleged that White and 27 other named prisoner plaintiffs were forced to undergo unacceptable, mandatory, random, or orchestrated specialized strip searches during an incident on August 29, 2025. Although the complaint listed all 28 prisoners as plaintiffs, only White signed it. White was also the only prisoner who filed a signed application to proceed without paying the filing fee and a prisoner authorization; the court had granted White permission to proceed without paying the fee.

Court’s analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 allows multiple plaintiffs to join one lawsuit when their claims arise from the same event or related events and involve a common legal or factual question. Rule 21 allows a court to separate claims when doing so would promote fairness, efficiency, and effective case management.

The court found that the practical problems of managing a lawsuit involving multiple unrepresented prisoners supported separation. Each prisoner could appear only for himself or herself and could not represent the others. Each unrepresented plaintiff would also have to personally sign every filing. Because prisoners in a pretrial detention facility could be released or transferred, some plaintiffs might be unable to sign later filings. The court also cited security concerns that would limit the prisoners’ ability to communicate, discuss strategy, share evidence, or exchange copies of filings. The court concluded that these circumstances could cause piecemeal submissions, delays, and missed deadlines.

Ruling

The court severed the claims of all plaintiffs other than Robert White under Rule 21. White will proceed as the sole plaintiff in this action. The Clerk of Court must open a separate civil action, with a new docket number, for each of the 27 other named plaintiffs and file a copy of the complaint and this order in each new case. Those cases will proceed independently unless the court later orders otherwise. The court also stated that separation did not rule out later treating the cases as related or combining them for appropriate purposes.

After the new cases are opened, the other plaintiffs will be directed to submit signed complaint signature pages and either pay the required fees or submit completed applications to proceed without paying the fees and prisoner authorizations. The court did not decide the merits of the alleged searches or whether the new cases may ultimately proceed. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying appellate fees for purposes of an appeal.