Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 14, 2022

Vazquez-Diaz v. Doe

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:21-cv-03447
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Vazquez-Diaz v. Doe, Judge Swain directed the clerk to vacate the prior filing bar and judgment while denying appeal IFP status.

Who this affects

Luis A. Vazquez-Diaz and the parties to his reopened federal action; the order also affects whether he may proceed without paying the filing fee on an appeal from this order.

What happened

In Vazquez-Diaz v. Doe, the court addressed an earlier order that had barred Luis A. Vazquez-Diaz from proceeding without paying the filing fee and had dismissed his case.

The Second Circuit later ruled that, because Vazquez-Diaz was a civilly committed detainee not held because of a criminal conviction or pending criminal charges, he was not subject to the three-strikes rule used in the earlier order. The district court then reopened the case.

Judge Swain directed the clerk to vacate the earlier bar order and judgment. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Vazquez-Diaz v. Doe · No. 1:21-cv-03447
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 14, 2022

Background

Luis A. Vazquez-Diaz filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. He was civilly confined in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons at the Federal Medical Center in Springfield, Missouri.

The district court had previously treated Vazquez-Diaz as a prisoner under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. It determined that he was barred by the Act’s three-strikes provision from proceeding without paying the filing fee unless he faced an imminent danger of serious physical harm. The court denied his request to proceed without paying the fee and dismissed the action without prejudice.

Second Circuit Mandate and District Court Action

Vazquez-Diaz appealed. The Second Circuit vacated the earlier bar order and judgment, holding that a civilly committed detainee who is not detained because of a criminal conviction or pending criminal charges is not a “prisoner” subject to the three-strikes rule. The district court then reopened the matter.

Following the Second Circuit’s mandate, the district court directed the clerk to vacate the earlier bar order and judgment.

Disposition

The court directed the clerk to vacate the bar order and judgment. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this 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.