Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 5, 2021

Blanding v. Department of Corrections

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:20-cv-09421
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Blanding v. Brann, Judge McMahon dismissed Blanding’s complaint without prejudice because he neither paid the fees nor submitted required forms or updated his address.

Who this affects

Johnny Blanding’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice for failing to comply with the court’s fee-or-forms order and for failing to provide a current mailing address. The court also denied IFP status for an appeal.

What happened

In Blanding v. Department of Corrections, Johnny Blanding filed a federal civil complaint and asked to proceed without paying the required filing fees upfront.

The court ordered Blanding to submit completed forms and authorization or pay the $400 required to bring the case. The order was returned as undeliverable, public records showed that Blanding had been released to parole supervision, and he did not update his mailing address or contact the court.

Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Blanding did not comply with the court’s order. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal and directed the Clerk of Court to mail Blanding a copy of the order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Blanding v. Department of Corrections · No. 1:20-cv-09421
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Jan. 5, 2021

Background

Johnny Blanding filed a civil complaint and requested permission to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront, a status commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP). On November 19, 2020, the court ordered him, within 30 days, either to submit a completed IFP request and prisoner authorization or to pay the $400 in fees required for the action. The order explained that the higher $402 fee that took effect on December 1, 2020, did not apply because Blanding filed the action earlier.

On December 8, 2020, the court’s order was returned as undeliverable. Public records maintained by the New York City Department of Corrections showed that Blanding had been released to parole supervision. Blanding did not comply with the court’s order, notify the court of a new mailing address, or make further contact with the court.

Ruling

Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed Blanding’s complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The opinion does not address the underlying claims. The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail Blanding a copy of the order and note service on the docket. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal.

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.