Randolph v. Wilson
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-09678
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Randolph v. Wilson, Judge McMahon denied an extension and dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Randolph neither paid the fee nor filed authorization.
Ryan Randolph's complaint against Officer Wilson was dismissed without prejudice because Randolph did not submit the required prisoner authorization or pay the filing fee. The order did not decide the merits of his allegations.
What happened
In Randolph v. Wilson, the court had ordered Ryan Randolph to file a completed prisoner authorization or pay the $400 filing fee. The orders warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal.
Randolph asked for 120 more days to pay the fee. The court denied that request and dismissed the complaint without prejudice because he had done neither of the required things.
Judge McMahon also directed the Clerk to mail Randolph the order and said an appeal would not be taken in good faith, so Randolph could not proceed without paying the appeal filing costs.
The detailed version
- Randolph v. Wilson · No. 1:20-cv-09678
- Colleen McMahon
- Mar. 12, 2021
Background
Ryan Randolph sued Officer Wilson. The court had previously ordered Randolph to submit a completed prisoner authorization or pay the $400 fee required to file a civil action. Those orders warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal.
On February 17, 2021, Randolph asked for a 120-day extension to prepay the filing fee.
Ruling
The court denied Randolph's request for an extension. Because Randolph had not filed the prisoner authorization or paid the fee, the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The dismissal was based on the filing requirements and did not decide the underlying allegations against Officer Wilson.
The court also directed the Clerk of Court to mail Randolph a copy of the order and record service on the docket. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Randolph permission to proceed without paying the appeal filing fee.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.