Cameron v. Clark

Background

Gilbert Cameron filed the action without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. The opinion states that he was detained at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center on Rikers Island. Cameron’s allegations concerned an asserted malicious prosecution related to his 2010 Bronx County conviction.

The Prison Litigation Reform Act’s “three-strikes” rule, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), limits a prisoner’s ability to proceed without paying filing fees when the prisoner has had three or more prior actions or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a legally sufficient claim. On May 7, 2021, the court ordered Cameron to show why the rule should not bar him from proceeding without paying fees in future civil actions in that court. Cameron submitted an affirmation on May 27, 2021.

Court’s Analysis

The court found that Cameron had three or more qualifying prior dismissals while he was a prisoner. It also found that his affirmation did not provide sufficient reason to avoid the bar because it repeated his allegations rather than showing why the three-strikes rule should not apply.

The resulting bar applies to Cameron’s future civil actions filed without paying fees in this court while he is a prisoner, unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court also warned that frivolous filings could lead to additional sanctions, including monetary penalties.

Disposition

Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied Cameron’s request to proceed without paying the filing fee and dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice under the three-strikes rule. The footnote explains that Cameron may start a new action by paying the filing fee, but any new prisoner civil-rights complaint would then be reviewed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court separately certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal.

The opinion does not identify the three prior actions or appeals that counted as strikes.