Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 8, 2023

Howard v. Annucci

Judge
Cathy Seibel
Docket
7:23-cv-06923
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Howard v. Annucci, Judge Swain required fees or an application, an authorization, and an original signature within 30 days.

Who this affects

Alfonso A. Howard and the pending civil action; the order also concerns the named defendants because the case will not be processed or summonses issued unless Howard complies with the filing requirements.

What happened

In Howard v. Annucci, Alfonso A. Howard filed a lawsuit without paying the required fees, completing an application to proceed without prepaying fees, submitting prisoner authorization, or signing the complaint. The order states that Howard is incarcerated and representing himself.

The court gave Howard 30 days from the order to either pay $402 or submit the required application and authorization, and to submit an original signature page. No summons will be issued yet. If he does not comply, the action will be dismissed; if he complies, the clerk’s office will process the case.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide the claims’ merits.

The detailed version

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

Case
Howard v. Annucci · No. 7:23-cv-06923
Judge
Cathy Seibel
Date
Aug. 8, 2023

Background

Alfonso A. Howard, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility and is representing himself, filed a civil action against Anthony Annucci, Joseph Sergeant, and two defendants identified as John Doe. He submitted the complaint without paying the filing fees, without a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees, without a prisoner authorization, and without signing the complaint.

Court’s order

The court explained that a prisoner must either pay $402 in fees—a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee—or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees and a prisoner authorization. The authorization allows deductions from the prisoner’s account toward the filing fee and permits the court to obtain account statements for the previous six months.

The court directed Howard, within 30 days of the order, to do both of the following if he wished to continue the action:

1. Pay the $402 in fees or submit the required application and prisoner authorization, labeled with docket number 23-CV-6923 (LTS); and 2. Resubmit the complaint’s signature page with an original signature.

The court stated that no summons would be issued at that time. If Howard complied, the clerk’s office would process the case. If he failed to comply within the allowed period, the action would be dismissed.

Appeal-related ruling

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.

What the order did not decide

This order addressed filing requirements and did not decide the merits of Howard’s claims against the defendants.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.