Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 12, 2022

Jones v. The City of New York Department of Corrections

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-02958
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Jones v. The City of New York Department of Corrections, Judge Swain denied a fee waiver and dismissed the action without prejudice under the three-strikes rule because no imminent danger was shown.

Who this affects

Rafael Arden Jones, Sr.; the order also affects his ability, while imprisoned, to file future civil actions without paying the filing fee and to appeal this order without paying it.

What happened

In Jones v. The City of New York Department of Corrections, Rafael Arden Jones, Sr. filed a civil action without paying the filing fee while detained and representing himself. He described events connected to his criminal proceedings, missed court dates, and his candidacy for the 2024 presidential election.

The court said Jones had three earlier cases dismissed for being frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, a prisoner with three such dismissals generally cannot file a new case without paying the filing fee unless the complaint shows an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court found that Jones’s complaint did not make that showing.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied Jones’s request to proceed without paying the filing fee and dismissed the action without prejudice under the three-strikes rule. The court also said Jones remains barred from filing future actions without paying the fee while he is a prisoner, noted an additional filing restriction, and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from the order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jones v. The City of New York Department of Corrections · No. 1:22-cv-02958
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Apr. 12, 2022

Background

Rafael Arden Jones, Sr. filed this action without paying the filing fee and represented himself. The opinion states that he was detained at the Anna M. Kross Center. His complaint described events related to pending criminal proceedings, alleged that he was a candidate for the 2024 U.S. presidential election, and alleged that he missed several court dates in 2021 because he had been labeled as quarantined. It also stated that his defense counsel asked to be relieved after learning that Jones had sued him.

Three-strikes rule

The Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), generally prevents a prisoner from starting a civil action or appeal without paying the filing fee after three earlier actions or appeals were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failing to state a claim. An exception applies when the prisoner is under an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court relied on an earlier order stating that Jones was subject to this three-strikes bar. The court explained that imminent danger must exist when the complaint is filed and found that Jones’s complaint did not show such danger.

Ruling

The court denied Jones’s application to proceed without paying the filing fee and dismissed the action without prejudice under the PLRA’s three-strikes rule. The dismissal without prejudice means the order did not state that refiling was permanently barred, but the court said Jones remains barred from filing future civil actions without paying the filing fee while he is a prisoner unless he is under an imminent threat of serious physical injury. The court also noted that, under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, Jones is barred from filing any new action without paying the filing fee unless he first obtains permission from the court. Finally, the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.

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.