Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 18, 2020

Jackson v. Department of Corrections

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:20-cv-09420
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Jackson v. Brann, Judge McMahon ordered payment or an application to proceed without prepaying fees within 30 days.

Who this affects

James Jackson and the processing of his civil action. He was required to pay the fees or submit the required forms within 30 days, or the action would be dismissed.

What happened

James Jackson, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights case without paying the required fees or submitting the forms needed to ask to proceed without prepaying them. The court had previously separated his complaint from a filing brought with 49 other detainees.

The court ordered Jackson, within 30 days, either to pay $400 in fees or submit a signed application and authorization allowing installment payments from his account. The court also said no summons would issue at that time and warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal of the action.

In Jackson v. Brann, Chief Judge Colleen McMahon denied payment-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jackson v. Department of Corrections · No. 1:20-cv-09420
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Nov. 18, 2020

Background

James Jackson filed this civil action without a lawyer while detained at the Vernon C. Bain Center on Rikers Island. He submitted the complaint without paying the filing fees and without a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees or a prisoner authorization. The opinion states that Jackson filed the complaint with 49 other detainees, and that a magistrate judge had previously severed the claims and directed the clerk to open separate cases.

Order

The court explained that a prisoner must either pay $400 in fees—a $350 filing fee and a $50 administrative fee—or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees and a prisoner authorization. If the court grants the application, the $350 filing fee is collected in installments from the prisoner's account. The authorization also directs the facility to make those deductions and provide certified copies of the prisoner's account statements for the preceding six months.

The court ordered Jackson to take one of those steps within 30 days of the order. Any application and authorization had to identify docket number 20-CV-9420 (CM). The clerk was directed to mail Jackson a copy of the order and record service on the docket. No summons was to issue at that time. The court stated that, if Jackson complied, the case would be processed under the clerk's procedures; if he did not comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed.

Appeal and effect

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied payment-free status for purposes of an appeal. The court did not address the merits of Jackson's claims. It also cautioned that a future dismissal on grounds such as frivolousness, maliciousness, or failure to state a claim could count as a strike under the prisoner litigation statute, and that three strikes generally restrict a prisoner's ability to file future actions without prepaying fees, subject to the statute's imminent-danger exception.

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.