Evans v. Santa
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-02511
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Evans v. Santa, Chief Judge Swain dismissed the duplicate complaint without prejudice and waived its filing fee.
James Earl Evans, Sr.'s duplicate complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and he was not charged the $350 filing fee for this action. Case Manager Lyndsay Santa and Case Worker Brook Livingston were defendants in the dismissed action. The underlying claims remain unresolved in the pending case identified by docket number 23-CV-0626 (LTS).
What happened
In Evans v. Santa, James Earl Evans, Sr., who is incarcerated and representing himself, sued Case Manager Lyndsay Santa and Case Worker Brook Livingston. The complaint concerned events on February 12, 2022.
The detailed version
- Evans v. Santa · No. 1:23-cv-02511
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 26, 2023
Background
James Earl Evans, Sr., who was incarcerated at Mohawk Correctional Facility and represented himself, sued Case Manager Lyndsay Santa and Case Worker Brook Livingston. He identified February 12, 2022, as the date his claims arose. The court stated that Evans had already filed a substantially similar complaint against the same defendants concerning claims arising on the same date. That earlier case remained pending under docket number 23-CV-0626 (LTS).
Ruling
The court dismissed this complaint without prejudice because it duplicated the pending case. The court stated that Evans could seek permission in the pending case to add any new claim that was not included there. Because the court believed the duplicate filing may have been an error, it directed that Evans not be charged the $350 filing fee for this action and that no money be deducted or held from his prison trust account for this lawsuit.
Additional orders
Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The opinion does not describe the underlying civil-rights claims or decide their merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.