Peterkin v. Quick Chill Food Services
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-07819
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Peterkin v. Quick Chill Food Services, Judge McMahon denied Peterkin’s request for a refund of his $350 filing fee.
Kahane Peterkin, an incarcerated plaintiff proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying the filing fee, remains responsible for the full $350 filing fee under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, even though his case was dismissed after he voluntarily withdrew it.
What happened
In Kahane Peterkin v. Quick Chill Food Services, Peterkin, who was incarcerated and representing himself, had filed a civil-rights lawsuit without paying the filing fee upfront. The court later dismissed that lawsuit after Peterkin asked to withdraw it.
Peterkin told the court that he was being charged the filing fee and asked for a refund, saying the case had never been filed and the defendants had not been served. The government’s prisoner-lawsuit law requires prisoners who receive permission to proceed without paying upfront to pay the full filing fee, even if the case is dismissed or voluntarily withdrawn.
Judge Colleen McMahon denied Peterkin’s refund request, concluding that the court had no discretion to stop collection of the fee. She also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying the appellate fee.
The detailed version
- Peterkin v. Quick Chill Food Services · No. 1:19-cv-07819
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 17, 2020
Background
Kahane Peterkin filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while incarcerated, representing himself and asking to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. The complaint named Quick Chill Food Services and officials of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision. The court previously directed Peterkin to amend his complaint because the defendants and alleged events did not appear to be located in the Southern District of New York and because some claims appeared untimely.
After Peterkin filed an amended complaint, the court directed him to explain why the case should not be transferred to the Western District of New York. Peterkin instead moved to withdraw the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). The court granted that motion and dismissed the action on December 3, 2019.
Filing-fee dispute
Peterkin later sent two letters asking the court to refund the filing fee and stop charging him. He argued that the case had “never [been] filed” and that the defendants had never been served.
The court applied the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which requires a prisoner who proceeds without prepaying the filing fee to pay the full fee in installments. The court explained that this obligation arises before the court evaluates the complaint’s merits. Peterkin’s authorization form also stated that the full $350 filing fee would be deducted from his prison account even if the case were dismissed or voluntarily withdrawn.
Ruling
Judge Colleen McMahon denied Peterkin’s request for a refund. The court stated that, although it was sympathetic to his financial concerns, the Prison Litigation Reform Act did not give it discretion to stop collection of the filing fee.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying the appellate fee. The Clerk was directed to mail Peterkin a copy of the order and record service on the docket.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.