Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 16, 2020

Richardson v. Duane Reade Corporation

Judge
Louis Stanton
Docket
1:20-cv-07578
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Dewayne Richardson v. Duane Reade Corporation, Judge McMahon ordered payment or prisoner authorization within 30 days before the case could proceed.

Who this affects

Dewayne Richardson, a detained prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, and the progress of his action against Duane Reade Corporation and the other defendants.

What happened

Dewayne Richardson, who was detained at the Vernon C. Bain Center and represented himself, sued Duane Reade Corporation and others. He submitted an application to proceed without paying the fees upfront, but he did not submit the required prisoner authorization.

The court ordered Richardson, within 30 days, either to pay $400 in fees or submit the authorization allowing installment deductions from his account. The court directed the Clerk to mail him the order, and no summons would issue at that time. The order warned that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply.

Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon issued the order on September 16, 2020. She also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Richardson v. Duane Reade Corporation · No. 1:20-cv-07578
Judge
Louis Stanton
Date
Sept. 16, 2020

Background

Dewayne Richardson brought this civil action against Duane Reade Corporation and other defendants while detained at the Vernon C. Bain Center. The opinion states that Richardson was proceeding without a lawyer. He submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis (without prepaying court fees), but he did not submit the separate prisoner authorization required for a prisoner seeking that status.

Order

The court explained that a prisoner must either pay $400 in fees or request permission to proceed without prepayment by submitting the required paperwork. If permission is granted, the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires the $350 filing fee to be collected in installments from the prisoner's account. The prisoner authorization directs the facility to make those deductions and provide certified copies of the prisoner's account statements for the previous six months. The $50 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted permission to proceed without prepayment under the cited statute.

The court ordered Richardson to do one of two things within 30 days of the order: pay the $400 in fees or complete and submit the attached prisoner authorization, labeled with docket number 20-CV-7578 (CM). The Clerk was directed to mail him a copy of the order and note service on the docket. No summons was to issue at that time. The order states that the action would be dismissed if Richardson failed to comply within the allowed time.

Appeal and additional warning

Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith, and permission to appeal without prepaying fees was denied. The order also warned that a prisoner action dismissed as frivolous or for failing to state a claim may count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and that three strikes generally prevent a prisoner from proceeding without prepaying fees 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.