Perkins v. Talton
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-09562
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Perkins v. Talton, Judge McMahon paused the case while Perkins addressed whether he could waive the filing fee under the prisoner three-strikes rule.
Michael Perkins, who sought to proceed without prepaying the filing fee, and Correction Officer Talton, the defendant. The order paused the case and did not decide the underlying claims.
What happened
In Perkins v. Talton, Michael Perkins, who was being held at the Manhattan Detention Center and was representing himself, sued Correction Officer Talton. Perkins asked to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.
The court said the prisoner three-strikes rule may prevent a detained person from proceeding without paying fees after three qualifying prior cases. Earlier courts had found that Perkins was subject to that rule, but another related case gave him an opportunity to provide information showing that the rule did not apply.
The court held this case in abeyance, meaning it paused the matter, until Perkins responded in the related case. Judge Colleen McMahon also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Perkins v. Talton · No. 1:19-cv-09562
- Colleen McMahon
- Dec. 17, 2019
Background
Michael Perkins, who was being held in the Manhattan Detention Center, brought this action without a lawyer against Correction Officer Talton, Shield No. 19156. Perkins asked to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance.
Three-strikes rule
The Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes provision generally bars a prisoner from proceeding without prepaying the filing fee when the prisoner has had three or more earlier federal actions or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. An exception applies if the prisoner is in immediate danger of serious physical injury.
The opinion states that this court and two other federal district courts had previously recognized that Perkins was barred by the three-strikes provision from filing a new federal civil action without prepaying the fee while he was a prisoner. The opinion also states that the cases in the other districts were later dismissed because Perkins did not pay the filing fee. The court noted that Perkins could still file a new case by paying the fee.
Related proceeding
In a separate case, the court had dismissed Perkins’s complaint without prejudice and allowed him to submit a declaration addressing whether he had three qualifying prior cases. His response was still due. Because that response could affect whether he could proceed without prepaying the fee here, the court said it could not yet decide his request in this case.
Ruling
The court held this matter in abeyance pending Perkins’s response to the order in the related proceeding, No. 1:19-CV-9333 (S.D.N.Y.). The Clerk was directed to assign the case to Judge Colleen McMahon’s docket, mail Perkins a copy of the order, and note service on the docket. The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.