Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 26, 2023

Clanton v. blinken

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-04284
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Clanton v. Blinken: Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice after Clanton neither paid filing fees nor submitted the required fee-waiver application.

Who this affects

Stanford Charles Clanton, whose complaint was dismissed without prejudice for failing to submit the required fee-waiver application or pay the filing fee.

What happened

In Clanton v. Blinken, the court required Stanford Charles Clanton to either submit an application to proceed without paying filing fees or pay the $402 filing fee.

Clanton did neither by the deadline. Instead, he filed a “Master Bill of Lading” with a $1 bill attached.

Judge Swain dismissed the complaint without prejudice, directed the clerk to send Clanton a $1 check and the order, and closed the case. The court also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Clanton v. blinken · No. 1:23-cv-04284
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 26, 2023

Background

On May 24, 2023, the court ordered Stanford Charles Clanton to submit, within 30 days, an application to proceed without paying filing fees (an “IFP application”) or pay the $402 required to file a civil action. The order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint.

Clanton did not submit the application or pay the filing fee. Instead, on June 21, 2023, he filed a “Master Bill of Lading” with a $1 bill attached.

Ruling

The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The court directed the clerk to issue a $1 check and send it, along with a copy of the order, to Clanton by certified mail. The order closed the case and directed the clerk to enter judgment.

The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Clanton permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The opinion does not address the underlying claims.

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.