Morrow v. Janis
- Nelson Roman
- 7:23-cv-03224
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Morrow v. Janis, Judge Swain denied a request to reduce prisoner filing-fee deductions and ordered a signed authorization or payment within 30 days.
Neb Morrow, an incarcerated plaintiff, must either pay the stated fees or submit a signed authorization for installment deductions before the action proceeds.
What happened
In Morrow v. Janis, Neb Morrow asked the court to reduce the amount deducted from his prison account for filing this civil action. He said he owed $100 for a correspondence course and had $70 in his account.
The court ruled that federal law does not allow it to reduce the required initial payment. It gave Morrow 30 days either to pay the $402 in fees or submit a signed authorization allowing the filing fee to be collected from his account in installments.
The court also ordered the Clerk to file Morrow’s attached complaint as an amended complaint and said no summonses would issue yet. Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied in forma pauperis status for any appeal, concluding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Morrow v. Janis · No. 7:23-cv-03224
- Nelson Roman
- June 6, 2023
Background
Neb Morrow filed this civil action while incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility. The Court had previously directed him either to pay $402 in fees—the $350 filing fee and $52 administrative fee—or submit a prisoner authorization. Morrow submitted an unsigned authorization and an affidavit asking the Court to limit deductions from his prison trust-fund account to 20% of the current average six-month deposit amount.
Morrow stated that he owed $100 for a correspondence course, had $70 in his account, and would face significant hardship if he did not receive the requested reduction. He also attached a copy of his complaint with amendments.
Court’s Analysis
The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires a prisoner who proceeds without paying the filing fee in advance to pay the full filing fee over time. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), the initial partial filing fee is based on 20% of the greater of the average monthly deposits or the average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account during the six months before the complaint was filed. Monthly payments follow when funds are available.
The Court held that it did not have discretion to reduce the amount required by the statute. Morrow therefore had to pay the $402 in fees or submit a signed prisoner authorization acknowledging that the $350 filing fee would be collected in installments. The Court noted that the $52 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted permission to proceed without prepaying fees.
Order
The Court denied Morrow’s request to direct the agency holding him in custody to deduct less than the statutory amount. It directed him, within 30 days, either to pay the $402 in fees or submit a signed prisoner authorization. No summonses were to issue at that time. The Court stated that failure to comply within the allowed period would result in dismissal of the action, but the order did not dismiss the action at that time.
The Court also directed the Clerk to detach the complaint attached to Morrow’s affidavit and file it separately as an amended complaint. Finally, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the Court denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal because it certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.