Bradshaw v. City of New York
- Laura Swain
- 1:21-cv-10142
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bradshaw v. City of New York, Judge Swain declined to reopen the closed action and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
Jay Bradshaw, whose closed action remained closed and whose request for fee-free appellate status was denied; any new action would have to be filed separately with payment, subject to the stated filing restrictions.
What happened
Bradshaw v. City of New York had already been dismissed without prejudice under a law limiting fee-free lawsuits by certain prisoners. Bradshaw then asked to pay the filing fees in this case.
The court explained that the case was closed and that paying the fee would require Bradshaw to start a new civil action. Bradshaw remains barred from filing future actions without paying fees while in custody unless he alleges an immediate serious threat of physical injury.
Judge Swain also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Bradshaw permission to appeal without paying the fee. The clerk was directed to mail Bradshaw a copy of the order.
The detailed version
- Bradshaw v. City of New York · No. 1:21-cv-10142
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 19, 2022
Background
In an earlier order dated December 7, 2021, the court dismissed this action without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That earlier order stated that Bradshaw could start a new action and pay the filing fees for it. Bradshaw later sent a letter saying that he wanted to pay the filing fees in this action.
Court’s ruling
The court stated that this action was closed. It did not allow Bradshaw to pay the filing fee in the closed action; instead, it explained that he could start a new action and submit payment in that new civil action. The court also stated that Bradshaw remains barred from filing future actions without paying the filing fee while he is in custody, unless he alleges that he is under an imminent threat of serious physical injury.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The clerk was directed to mail Bradshaw a copy of the order and record service on the docket.
Potential new action
The opinion’s footnote states that a new complaint would be reviewed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. That law requires dismissal of a prisoner’s civil-rights complaint if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks money from a defendant protected from that relief. The footnote also states that the court may restrict a vexatious litigant from filing future actions without first obtaining the court’s permission.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.