Ildefonso v. J.M. Banks, D.H.O.
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-10421
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ildefonso v. Banks, Chief Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Ildefonso neither paid the fee nor submitted required forms.
Benito Ildefonso's complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and permission to appeal without paying the fee was denied.
What happened
In Ildefonso v. J.M. Banks, D.H.O., Benito Ildefonso brought a civil complaint in the Southern District of New York.
The court had ordered Ildefonso to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee and a prisoner authorization, or to pay the $400 filing fee. The order warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal.
Because Ildefonso did none of those things, the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice. Chief Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the appeal filing fee.
The detailed version
- Ildefonso v. J.M. Banks, D.H.O. · No. 1:19-cv-10421
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 10, 2020
Background
The court had previously ordered Benito Ildefonso, within 30 days, to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee and a prisoner authorization, or to pay the $400 fee required to file a civil action. The prior order stated that failing to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint.
Ruling
Ildefonso did not submit the required application and authorization and did not pay the fee. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915.
The court also 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 appeal without paying the required fee. The clerk was directed to mail the order to Ildefonso and record service on the docket.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.