Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 21, 2020

Herring v. Kiszke

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:20-cv-08765
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Herring v. Kiszke, Judge McMahon ordered Walter C. Herring to pay filing fees or submit required forms before the case could proceed.

Who this affects

Walter C. Herring, the incarcerated plaintiff, was required to pay the fees or submit the required forms for his case to proceed.

What happened

Herring v. Kiszke concerns a lawsuit filed by Walter C. Herring, who was incarcerated and represented himself. He submitted the complaint without paying the required fees, did not provide a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees, and submitted an outdated prisoner authorization.

The court gave Herring 30 days to pay $400 in fees or submit the required application and authorization forms. The authorization would allow fee payments to be deducted from his prisoner account in installments. The court also directed the Clerk to mail him the order, and no summons would issue at that time.

Judge Colleen McMahon stated that the case would be processed if Herring complied and dismissed if he did not. She also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees and warned that certain future dismissals could count as strikes under federal law.

The detailed version

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

Case
Herring v. Kiszke · No. 7:20-cv-08765
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Oct. 21, 2020

Background

Walter C. Herring, who was incarcerated at the Orange County Jail, filed this action without a lawyer against Sgt. Keith Kiszke and other defendants. The complaint was submitted without the required filing fees, without a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning without prepaying the fees, and with an outdated prisoner authorization.

Order

The court ordered Herring, within 30 days, to do one of two things: pay $400 in fees, consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $50 administrative fee, or submit the attached IFP application and prisoner authorization forms. If the court grants IFP status, the prisoner authorization permits the $350 filing fee to be collected from Herring's account in installments and requires certified copies of account statements for the previous six months. The $50 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted IFP status.

The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail Herring a copy of the order and record service on the docket. No summons was to issue at that time. The order states that the case would be processed under the Clerk's procedures if Herring complied and that the action would be dismissed if he failed to comply within the allowed time.

Appeal and warning

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The court also cautioned that a prisoner's action dismissed as frivolous or for failing to state a claim can count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and that three strikes generally prevent a prisoner from filing new actions IFP unless the prisoner faces imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Judge

The order was signed by Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon.

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.