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

Dillon v. Rosen

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-07035
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Dillon v. Rosen, Judge Swain ordered Chauncey Dillon to pay filing fees or submit an application to proceed without prepaying them.

Who this affects

Chauncey Dillon, an incarcerated plaintiff representing himself, must either pay the required fees or submit a completed application to proceed without prepaying them within 30 days. The action may be dismissed if he does not comply.

What happened

Dillon v. Rosen concerns Chauncey Dillon’s civil action filed while he was incarcerated and representing himself. He submitted a complaint and a prisoner authorization but did not submit a completed application to proceed without prepaying court fees.

The court gave Dillon 30 days to either pay $402 in filing and administrative fees or submit the required application. If approved, the application would allow him to avoid paying the fees upfront, but the $350 filing fee would be collected from his prison account in installments. The court also said that no summons would issue at that time.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered Dillon to meet one of those requirements and stated that the action would be dismissed if he failed to comply. She also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Dillon v. Rosen · No. 1:22-cv-07035
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Aug. 18, 2022

Background

Chauncey Dillon, who was incarcerated at Shawangunk Correctional Facility, filed this civil action without a lawyer. He submitted the complaint with a prisoner authorization but did not submit a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.

Court’s Order

The court directed Dillon, within 30 days of the order, to do one of two things: pay the $402 required to file a civil action, consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee, or submit a completed IFP application. The court explained that if a prisoner’s IFP application is granted, the $350 filing fee must still be collected in installments from the prisoner’s account. The prisoner authorization permits those deductions and requires certified copies of the prisoner’s account statements for the previous six months.

No summons would issue at that time. The court stated that if Dillon complied, the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures; if he failed to comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed.

Appeal and Additional Notice

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The court also cautioned that certain dismissals of prisoner cases can count as “strikes” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.