Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 26, 2020

Christenson v. Doe

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:20-cv-01622
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Christenson v. Doe, Judge McMahon dismissed the unrepresented plaintiff’s case without prejudice for not seeking required permission to proceed without paying filing fees.

Who this affects

Mark C. Christenson’s case was dismissed without prejudice, and he was denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The opinion also leaves in place the earlier requirement that he obtain court permission before filing a new action without paying filing fees.

What happened

In Christenson v. Doe, Mark C. Christenson filed a new case without a lawyer. An earlier court order barred him from filing any new case without paying filing fees unless he first obtained the court’s permission to proceed without payment.

Christenson did not ask for that permission and did not pay the filing fees. The court treated him as asking to proceed without paying the fees, but he still had not complied with the earlier order.

Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the case without prejudice because Christenson had not sought the required permission. She also denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees, finding that 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
Christenson v. Doe · No. 1:20-cv-01622
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Feb. 26, 2020

Background

Mark C. Christenson filed this new case without a lawyer. The opinion states that, on June 20, 2018, the court had barred him from filing any new action without paying filing fees unless he first obtained the court’s permission to proceed without payment. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims against John Doe.

Christenson neither requested that permission nor paid the filing fees. The court assumed, for purposes of this order, that he sought to proceed without paying the fees.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1651 because Christenson had not complied with the earlier order requiring him to obtain permission before filing without paying the fees. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal did not itself bar refiling, although the opinion states that the earlier permission requirement remained applicable.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Christenson and record service on the docket.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.