Hickman v. The City of New York
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:20-cv-04699
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hickman v. The City of New York, Judge McMahon ordered the detained plaintiff to pay filing fees or submit a fee-waiver application.
Quandel Hickman, a detained plaintiff representing himself, must either pay the required filing fees or submit the required application within 30 days to avoid the dismissal described in the order.
What happened
Quandel Hickman, who is detained and representing himself, sued The City of New York. The opinion does not decide the claims in the lawsuit.
Judge McMahon ordered Hickman, within 30 days, either to pay $400 in court fees or submit a completed application to proceed without paying fees upfront. Hickman had submitted a prisoner authorization but not the required application.
Judge Colleen McMahon directed the Clerk to mail the order and stated that no summons would issue yet. If Hickman does not comply, the Court will dismiss the action; the Court also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
The detailed version
- Hickman v. The City of New York · No. 1:20-cv-04699
- Ronnie Abrams
- June 23, 2020
Background
Quandel Hickman brought this civil action against The City of New York while detained at the Anna M. Kross Correctional Center. He was representing himself. The opinion addresses only the filing-fee requirements and does not resolve the underlying claims.
Fee requirement
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 a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees. Hickman submitted the complaint with a prisoner authorization but did not submit a completed application.
The Court ordered Hickman, within 30 days of the order, to either pay the $400 or submit the attached application. If the Court grants the application, the $350 filing fee must be collected in installments from Hickman’s prison trust-fund account. The prisoner authorization permits those deductions and requires certified copies of account statements for the prior six months.
Order and effect
Judge Colleen McMahon directed the Clerk to mail Hickman a copy of the order and note service on the docket. No summons would issue at that time. The case would be processed under the Clerk’s procedures if Hickman complied. If he failed to comply within the allowed time, the Court stated that it would dismiss the action.
The Court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The Court cautioned that a later dismissal for frivolousness, maliciousness, or failure to state a claim could count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.