Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 19, 2021

Castro v. New York City Department of Corrections

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:21-cv-00686
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro SeFee Petition
In one sentence

In Castro v. New York City Department of Corrections, Judge McMahon ordered payment or an amended fee-waiver application before the case could proceed.

Who this affects

Angel L. Castro, who was required to pay the fees or submit an amended application to proceed without prepaying them, update his address, and comply within 30 days.

What happened

In Castro v. New York City Department of Corrections, Angel L. Castro filed the action without a lawyer while detained, and the court later learned he had been released. The court had not yet decided whether he could proceed without paying the filing fee.

The court gave Castro 30 days either to pay $402 in filing and administrative fees or submit an amended application to proceed without prepaying fees. He also had to keep the court informed of any address change. The court said no summons would be issued yet.

If Castro did not comply, the action would be dismissed for failure to follow the order, without prejudice to refiling. Judge Colleen McMahon also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Castro v. New York City Department of Corrections · No. 1:21-cv-00686
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Feb. 19, 2021

Background

Angel L. Castro filed this action without a lawyer while detained in the Eric M. Taylor Center on Rikers Island. Before deciding his request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning without prepaying the filing fee, the court determined from public records that he had been released from custody.

The court explained that a person who qualifies as a prisoner when filing a complaint is subject to certain requirements under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Those requirements include paying the $350 filing fee in installments from a prison trust account and potentially being barred from proceeding IFP under the “three strikes” rule if the person previously had three qualifying federal civil actions or appeals dismissed. The court also noted that a person who was a prisoner when filing must exhaust available prison grievance remedies.

Order

Because Castro was no longer in the custody of the New York City Department of Correction, the court stated that his obligation to pay fees would be determined by whether he qualified for IFP status like any other non-prisoner. The court directed him, if he wished to continue the action and proceed IFP, to submit an amended IFP application within 30 days. Alternatively, he could pay $402, consisting of the $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee for litigants who do not proceed IFP.

The court also required Castro to notify it in writing of any change in his address. It directed the clerk to mail the order and a change-of-address form to Castro’s last known address at the Eric M. Taylor Center. No summons would issue at that time.

Disposition

The court ordered Castro, within 30 days, either to pay the $402 in fees or submit an amended IFP application labeled with the case number. It stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the action for failure to comply with the order, without prejudice to refiling. The court did not dismiss the action in this order. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. Judge Colleen McMahon issued the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.