Bradley v. Department of Corrections
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-09400
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bradley v. Department of Corrections, Judge McMahon dismissed Carlos Bradley’s complaint without prejudice for failing to follow filing-fee instructions.
Carlos Bradley’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice because he did not comply with the court’s filing-fee order or update his mailing address. His request to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal was also denied.
What happened
In Bradley v. Department of Corrections, the court had ordered Carlos Bradley to either submit paperwork to proceed without paying filing fees and a prisoner authorization, or pay the required filing fees.
The order was returned because Bradley could not be reached at the mailing address on record. The court stated that he was no longer in New York City Department of Corrections custody, had not reported a new address, and had not contacted the court or complied with its order.
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed Bradley’s complaint without prejudice. She also denied his request to proceed without paying fees for an appeal and stated that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Bradley v. Department of Corrections · No. 1:20-cv-09400
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 5, 2021
Background
Carlos Bradley filed a civil complaint without prepaying the filing fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). On November 18, 2020, the court ordered him, within 30 days, to either submit a completed request to proceed without prepaying fees and a prisoner authorization or pay the $400 required to file a civil action at that time.
The court stated that the order was returned on December 1, 2020, marked “Return To Sender – Not Known Unable to Forward.” Public records maintained by the New York City Department of Corrections showed that Bradley was no longer in its custody. Bradley did not comply with the order, notify the court of a new mailing address, or contact the court further.
Ruling
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The opinion does not address the underlying claims. The court also directed the Clerk of Court to mail Bradley a copy of the order and record service on the docket.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Bradley permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. A footnote explained that although the filing fees increased to $402 on December 1, 2020, the increase did not apply because Bradley filed the action before that date.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.