Dawkins v. Newman
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:21-cv-00624
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Dawkins v. Newman, Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Dawkins neither paid filing fees nor filed an IFP application.
Jermaine Andrew Dawkins’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice because he did not pay the filing fee or submit the required application to proceed without paying fees. Any appeal also could not proceed without payment of fees under this order.
What happened
Dawkins v. Newman concerned Jermaine Andrew Dawkins’s complaint against James Newman, James Newman Law, PC, and Kyle Newman. The court had ordered Dawkins to either pay the required $402 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying fees.
Dawkins did neither within the required thirty-day period. The January 29, 2021 order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice. She also denied fee-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Dawkins v. Newman · No. 1:21-cv-00624
- Colleen McMahon
- Mar. 23, 2021
Background
The court had directed Plaintiff Jermaine Andrew Dawkins to submit a completed application to proceed without paying filing fees or pay the $402 required to file a civil action. The January 29, 2021 order gave him thirty days to comply and warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal.
Court’s Action
Dawkins did not submit the application or pay the fees. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal did not bar refiling based on the order’s stated ground.
Appeal-related ruling
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk was directed to mail the order to Dawkins and note service on the docket.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.