Antrobus v. Unified Court System
- Louis Stanton
- 1:21-cv-00380
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Antrobus v. Unified Court System, Judge Stanton gave Andre Antrobus 30 days to show imminent danger before deciding his fee-waiver request.
Andre Antrobus, who was detained and representing himself, received an opportunity to show that the imminent-danger exception allowed him to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. The Unified Court System, Department of Corrections, Rikers Island, and the other named defendants were not subjected to a merits ruling in this order.
What happened
In Antrobus v. Unified Court System, Andre Antrobus, who was detained on pending criminal charges and had no lawyer, asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court found that he had three prior qualifying dismissals, which generally barred him from proceeding without prepaying the fee.
The court said Antrobus could avoid that bar if he showed that he faced an immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint and that his claims sought relief connected to that danger. The complaint included allegations about the handling of the COVID-19 health crisis and requested health-care relief, but the court found it unclear whether those allegations met the legal standard.
Judge Louis L. Stanton gave Antrobus 30 days to submit a declaration explaining why the exception should apply. The court did not yet deny the fee request or dismiss the case; it stated that it would do so without prejudice if Antrobus did not respond or failed to show that the exception applied.
The detailed version
- Antrobus v. Unified Court System · No. 1:21-cv-00380
- Louis Stanton
- Feb. 18, 2021
Background
Andre Antrobus was detained at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center on pending criminal charges and was representing himself. He sued the Unified Court System, the Department of Corrections, Rikers Island, and other defendants. He asked to proceed without prepaying the filing fee.
The court stated that Antrobus had brought at least three earlier actions or appeals while incarcerated or detained that were dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), commonly called the “three strikes” rule, a prisoner with three such dismissals generally may not proceed without prepaying the filing fee unless he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the new complaint.
The court also noted that other detainees had been listed as possible additional plaintiffs, but they did not submit the required forms or sign the complaint. The court had already dismissed their claims without prejudice on February 16, 2021.
Imminent-danger exception
The court explained that the danger must exist when the complaint is filed. The prisoner must also show a connection between that danger and at least some of the legal claims in the complaint. Antrobus’s complaint contained incoherent allegations concerning the Vietnam War, the Pentagon Papers, the Alamo, and endangered species. It also alleged that the New York City Department of Correction had mishandled the COVID-19 health crisis and requested, among other relief, an injunction concerning health care.
The court found the allegations too vague to determine whether Antrobus intended to claim that he was in imminent danger of serious physical harm and sought relief connected to that danger.
Court’s action
Because Antrobus was representing himself, the court gave him notice and an opportunity to respond before making a final decision that could be unfavorable to him. The court granted him leave to file a declaration showing that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury and that his claims sought relief connected to that danger.
The court directed Antrobus to file the declaration within 30 days. It stated that if he failed to respond, or if his declaration did not show that the imminent-danger exception applied, the court would deny his application to proceed without prepaying the filing fee and dismiss the action without prejudice. The order itself did not yet deny the application or dismiss the action. It directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order to Antrobus and record service on the docket.
Additional point
The court stated that the three-strikes rule did not prevent Antrobus from bringing the action if he prepaid the $402 filing fee.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.