Molina v. Department of Corrections
- Gregory Woods
- 1:20-cv-09483
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Molina v. Brann, Judge McMahon dismissed Luis Molina’s complaint without prejudice because he neither paid the filing fees nor submitted required forms.
Luis Molina’s civil action was dismissed without prejudice after he failed to pay the filing fees or submit the required forms; permission to appeal without paying fees was also denied.
What happened
In Luis Molina v. Commissioner Cynthia Brann, et al., the court required Molina to either pay the filing fees for his civil case or submit forms requesting permission to proceed without paying them.
The court’s earlier order gave Molina thirty days to comply and warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal. Molina did not submit the required forms or pay the fees.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling. She also denied permission to appeal without paying fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Molina v. Department of Corrections · No. 1:20-cv-09483
- Gregory Woods
- Jan. 7, 2021
Background
Luis Molina filed a civil action against Commissioner Cynthia Brann and other defendants. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
Required Filing Steps
On November 16, 2020, the court ordered Molina to do one of two things within thirty days: submit a completed request to proceed without paying the filing fees, along with a required prisoner authorization, or pay the $400 in fees then required to file a civil action. The order warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal. The opinion notes that the filing fees increased to $402 on December 1, 2020, but the higher amount did not apply because Molina’s action was filed before that date.
Molina did not submit the required request and authorization and did not pay the fees.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The opinion therefore did not reach the merits of Molina’s claims. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.
Effect
The dismissal was based on Molina’s failure to complete the required filing steps, not on a decision about the underlying claims. Because the court expressly dismissed the complaint without prejudice, the opinion did not state that refiling was barred.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.