LoRusso v. Fox Corporation Broadcasting
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-08686
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In LoRusso v. Fox Corporation Broadcasting, Judge Swain denied filing without upfront fees and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the prisoner three-strikes rule.
Michael Anthony LoRusso’s ability to pursue this action without paying the filing fee upfront; the complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and he remained barred from proceeding without upfront fees while incarcerated unless he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury.
What happened
In LoRusso v. Fox Corporation Broadcasting, Michael Anthony LoRusso, who was incarcerated and representing himself, filed a complaint without paying the required filing fee. The court treated that filing as a request to proceed without paying the fee upfront.
The court said LoRusso had previously accumulated at least three qualifying dismissals, so federal law generally barred him from filing a new civil action without upfront payment while incarcerated. His allegations that Fox Corporation Broadcasting spread false information about the 2020 Presidential Election did not show that he faced an immediate danger of serious physical injury.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied LoRusso’s request to proceed without paying the fee upfront and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the prisoner three-strikes rule. The court said he could start a new action by paying the filing fee, and denied upfront-fee status for any appeal from the order.
The detailed version
- LoRusso v. Fox Corporation Broadcasting · No. 1:22-cv-08686
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 14, 2022
Background
Michael Anthony LoRusso, who was incarcerated at Polk Correctional Institution and represented himself, filed this action without paying the $402 filing fee. The court therefore treated the filing as a request to proceed without paying court fees upfront, commonly called in forma pauperis status.
LoRusso alleged that Fox Corporation Broadcasting disseminated false information concerning the 2020 Presidential Election. The opinion does not describe the specific legal claim or relief he sought.
Three-strikes rule
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner may not proceed without paying filing fees upfront if, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated, the prisoner brought an action or appeal that was 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 ruling determining that LoRusso was barred under this rule and noted several prior dismissals identified as qualifying strikes. The court found that his complaint did not show an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The opinion states that his allegations concerned information allegedly disseminated by a news broadcasting corporation, rather than such a danger.
Ruling
The court denied LoRusso’s request to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes rule. The court stated that LoRusso could commence a new action by paying the filing fee. It also stated that he would remain barred from proceeding without paying fees upfront in future actions while incarcerated unless he faced an imminent threat of serious physical injury.
The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.