Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 1, 2021

Dorsey v. Royce

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:21-cv-01173
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Dorsey v. Royce, Judge McMahon denied IFP status and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the three-strikes rule.

Who this affects

Leroy J. Dorsey is barred from filing new actions without paying filing fees while incarcerated unless he shows an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The complaint in this case was dismissed without prejudice; the defendants were not subjected to a merits ruling.

What happened

Dorsey v. Royce concerns a lawsuit filed by Leroy J. Dorsey, who was incarcerated and represented himself. He asked to file without paying the filing fee.

Dorsey alleged that the defendants violated his rights at Green Haven Correctional Facility from January through October 2019. The court said he had previously accumulated three qualifying dismissals and that his complaint did not show an imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed it.

Judge Colleen McMahon denied Dorsey’s request to proceed without paying the fee and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes rule. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal and said Dorsey could file a new action by paying the filing fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Dorsey v. Royce · No. 1:21-cv-01173
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Apr. 1, 2021

Background

Leroy J. Dorsey, who was incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility and represented himself, sued Mark Royce—Warden and other defendants. He asked to proceed without prepaying the filing fee, a status commonly called proceeding without payment of fees.

Dorsey alleged that the defendants violated his rights at Green Haven from January through October 2019. The opinion also refers to a letter in which Dorsey requested a transfer and said that his life was in danger, but the court found that he alleged no facts showing an imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed this action.

Three-Strikes Rule

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has had three or more prior federal actions or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim generally may not file a new action without paying the filing fee. The exception applies when the prisoner is under an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court stated that a prior related proceeding had already barred Dorsey from filing new actions without paying fees while incarcerated, and that this case did not meet the imminent-danger exception.

Ruling

The court denied Dorsey’s request to proceed without prepaying the filing fee and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes rule. Because the dismissal was without prejudice, the opinion states that Dorsey may commence a new action by paying the filing fees; that complaint would then be subject to prisoner screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. The court did not decide whether Dorsey’s underlying allegations against the defendants were legally valid.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.