Williams v. Bharara

Background

John T. Williams filed two civil actions while incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Marianna, Florida. He did not pay the filing fees or submit applications to proceed without prepaying them. In December 2018, the Court dismissed both actions without prejudice after relying on a prior determination by the Northern District of Georgia that Williams was barred from proceeding without prepayment under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Williams appealed. On March 20, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the December 2018 judgment and sent the actions back for further proceedings, including screening the complaints under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The Court of Appeals held that dismissals partly based on the three-strikes provision and partly based on lack of jurisdiction are mixed dismissals and do not count as strikes under Second Circuit law.

Three-strikes determination

The Prison Litigation Reform Act generally prevents a prisoner from proceeding without prepaying fees after three or more prior actions or appeals were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim, unless the prisoner faces imminent danger of serious physical injury. Although Williams was no longer in custody, the court treated him as a prisoner for this purpose because he was incarcerated when he submitted the complaints to the prison mail system.

The court conducted its own independent review rather than relying on another court’s earlier three-strikes determination. It concluded that Williams had not accumulated three strikes when he submitted the complaints. The court therefore determined that he was not barred under the Act from proceeding without prepayment of fees in these two actions. The opinion also notes that a separate, prospective filing bar was being considered in another action, but states that any such bar would not apply to these present actions.

Fees and disposition

A plaintiff must either pay the required fees or submit a signed application requesting permission to proceed without prepaying them. The court stated that the fee was $400 for each action, consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $50 administrative fee. Because Williams had done neither for either action, the court directed him, within 30 days of the order, either to pay $400 for each action, totaling $800, or to submit two separate applications, one for each docket.

Judge Louis L. Stanton vacated the December 21, 2018 order of dismissal and judgment as to both actions. No summons was to issue at that time. The court stated that, if Williams complied, the actions would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures; if he failed to comply within the permitted time, the court would dismiss the action in which he failed to comply.