Doe v. City of New York
- Analisa Torres
- 1:19-cv-09338
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In John Doe v. NYC Dept. of Corrections, Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Doe neither paid the filing fee nor submitted a fee-waiver application.
John Doe's complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and he was denied fee-waiver status for an appeal. The opinion does not describe any ruling on the merits of his claims against NYC Dept. of Corrections or the other defendants.
What happened
John Doe sued the New York City Department of Corrections and other defendants. The court had ordered him to submit an application to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the required $400 fee within 30 days.
Doe did neither. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling. The court also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal after finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon issued the dismissal order on November 19, 2019. The order directed the Clerk of Court to mail Doe a copy and record service on the docket.
The detailed version
- Doe v. City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-09338
- Analisa Torres
- Nov. 19, 2019
Background
John Doe filed a civil complaint against NYC Dept. of Corrections and other defendants. The court had previously ordered Doe to either submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee or pay the $400 filing fee required for a civil action. The order gave him 30 days and warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal.
Ruling
Doe did not submit the fee-waiver application and did not pay the filing fee. The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Doe a copy of the order and note service on the docket.
Effect
The case was dismissed without prejudice because Doe did not satisfy the filing-fee requirement. The order did not state that Doe was barred from filing another complaint.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.