Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 18, 2022

Williams v. Colby

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-04022
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Williams v. Colby, Judge Swain ordered payment or an IFP application and prisoner authorization within 30 days, warning the action would be dismissed otherwise.

Who this affects

Rashon Williams, a detained plaintiff representing himself, and the processing of his civil action; the order required him to pay the fees or submit the specified forms before the case could proceed.

What happened

In Williams v. Colby, Rashon Williams, who was detained and representing himself, filed a civil action without paying the required fees or submitting the forms needed to ask to proceed without prepaying them.

The court ordered Williams, within 30 days, either to pay $402 in filing and administrative fees or submit a signed application to proceed without prepayment and a prisoner authorization. The authorization would allow installment withdrawals from his account for the $350 filing fee and provide six months of account statements.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed that no summons issue yet and stated that the case would be processed if Williams complied. She also stated that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply and denied fee-free status for any appeal from the order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Williams v. Colby · No. 1:22-cv-04022
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 18, 2022

Background

Rashon Williams filed this civil action while detained at the Orange County Correctional Facility and representing himself. He submitted the complaint without paying the required fees and without a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees or a prisoner authorization.

Filing-fee requirements

The court explained that a prisoner filing a civil action must either pay $402—consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee—or request permission to proceed without prepaying fees. To make that request, Williams had to submit a signed application and a prisoner authorization. If permission were granted, the Prison Litigation Reform Act would require the $350 filing fee to be collected in installments from his account. The authorization also directs the correctional facility to make those deductions and provide certified account statements for the previous six months. The $52 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted permission to proceed without prepaying fees.

Order

Within 30 days of the order, Williams had to pay the $402 or submit the required application and authorization, labeled with docket number 22-CV-4022 (LTS). The court ordered that no summons issue at that time. It stated that the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures if Williams complied, and that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply within the allowed period.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for that appeal. The order did not decide the merits of Williams’s claims.

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.