Dupigny v. John/Jane Doe

Background

Hubert Dupigny, proceeding without a lawyer and incarcerated at MDC Brooklyn, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law used to seek relief for alleged constitutional-rights violations. The complaint alleged that United States Attorney Geoffrey Berman and Assistant District Attorneys Elinor Torlow, Mollie Bracewell, and Jacob Gutwilling violated his constitutional rights.

Reasoning

The court stated that Dupigny had previously filed a complaint against the same defendants raising substantially similar claims. That earlier case was still pending under docket number 20-CV-5346 (CM). Because this action duplicated the earlier case, the court concluded that filing and litigating it would serve no useful purpose.

The opinion also states that Dupigny had not submitted the filing fees or an application to proceed without prepaying fees, along with the required prisoner authorization. The court believed that he may have filed the duplicate complaint by mistake. It therefore directed that the Clerk not charge the $350 filing fee for this action and that prison officials not deduct or reserve funds from his prison trust-fund account for this action.

Disposition

Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice to Dupigny’s pending action under docket number 20-CV-5346 (CM). The court directed the Clerk to mail Dupigny a copy of the order and record service on the docket. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied status allowing Dupigny to appeal without prepaying fees.