Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 28, 2020

Gunn v. Doe

Judge
Louis Stanton
Docket
1:20-cv-00730
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Gunn v. Doe, Judge McMahon ordered Darrell Gunn to pay filing fees or submit forms to seek filing without prepayment.

Who this affects

Darrell Gunn, who was required to pay the filing fees or submit an application and authorization to seek filing without prepayment; the order also describes consequences that can apply to prisoners who receive qualifying dismissals.

What happened

Gunn v. Doe concerns Darrell Gunn’s complaint, which he filed without paying the required fees or submitting the forms needed to request filing without prepayment. The opinion states that Gunn is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility and is representing himself.

The court ordered Gunn, within 30 days, either to pay $400 in fees or submit a signed application to proceed without prepayment and a prisoner authorization. The authorization would allow installment payments of the filing fee from his account. No summons would issue at that time, and the action would be dismissed without prejudice if he did not comply.

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon issued the order on January 28, 2020. She also denied filing without prepayment for any appeal from the order and certified that such an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Gunn v. Doe · No. 1:20-cv-00730
Judge
Louis Stanton
Date
Jan. 28, 2020

Background

Darrell Gunn filed this civil action against Jane Doe without paying the required filing fees or submitting a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning without prepaying the filing fees. The opinion states that Gunn is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility and is proceeding without a lawyer.

Payment or IFP requirements

The court explained that a prisoner filing a civil action must either pay $400 in fees—a $350 filing fee and a $50 administrative fee—or submit an IFP application and a prisoner authorization. If IFP status is granted, the $350 filing fee must be collected in installments from the prisoner’s account. The prisoner authorization permits those deductions and requires certified copies of the account statements for the preceding six months to be sent to the court. The $50 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted IFP status.

Order and consequences

The court directed Gunn, within 30 days of the order, to pay the $400 or submit the IFP application and prisoner authorization, labeled with docket number 20-CV-730 (CM). The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Gunn and record service on the docket. No summons was to issue at that time. The order states that the action will be dismissed without prejudice if Gunn does not comply within the allowed time.

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order additionally cautioned that a later dismissal for frivolousness, maliciousness, or failure to state a claim could count as a statutory “strike,” and that three such strikes generally prevent a prisoner from proceeding IFP unless the prisoner faces imminent danger of serious physical injury.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.