Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 3, 2022

Vazquez-Diaz v. Doe

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-03315
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

Vazquez-Diaz v. Doe: Judge Swain denied fee-free filing and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the prisoner three-strikes rule.

Who this affects

Luis A. Vazquez-Diaz was denied permission to file without prepaying the fee, and his complaint was dismissed without prejudice. While he remains in custody, he is barred from future fee-free filings unless he faces imminent danger of serious physical injury.

What happened

In Vazquez-Diaz v. Doe, Luis A. Vazquez-Diaz filed a lawsuit without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. He alleged that he lost money and property during incarcerations in New York in 2004 and 2008.

The court said Vazquez-Diaz was barred by the prisoner three-strikes rule from filing a new case without paying the fee. The exception for prisoners facing imminent danger of serious physical injury did not apply because his allegations concerned past losses, not a danger existing when he filed the complaint.

Judge Swain denied the request to proceed without paying the fee and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The court also said Vazquez-Diaz remains barred from future fee-free filings while in custody unless he faces imminent danger of serious physical injury, and denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Vazquez-Diaz v. Doe · No. 1:22-cv-03315
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 3, 2022

Background

Luis A. Vazquez-Diaz, who was detained at the United States Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, brought this action without a lawyer. He asked to proceed without prepaying the filing fee, a procedure commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis.

Vazquez-Diaz alleged that he lost money and property while incarcerated in New York in 2004 and 2008. The opinion states that, in a prior related proceeding, the court had determined that he was barred from filing new actions without prepaying fees while he was a prisoner.

Legal standard

The court applied the Prison Litigation Reform Act's three-strikes rule, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That rule generally prevents a prisoner from proceeding without prepaying the filing fee if, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated or detained, the prisoner brought an action or appeal that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failing to state a legally sufficient claim. The exception applies when the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.

The court explained that the danger must exist when the complaint is filed. A danger that ended before filing is not enough. The court found that Vazquez-Diaz's allegations about past losses did not show that he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed this action.

Ruling

The court denied Vazquez-Diaz's request to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. It dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the three-strikes rule. The opinion explains that he may start a new action by paying the filing fee, after which the complaint would be reviewed under the statutory screening process for prisoner civil-rights complaints.

The court also stated that Vazquez-Diaz remains barred from filing future actions without prepaying fees while he is in custody unless he is under an imminent threat of serious physical injury. It certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

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.