Walters v. City of New York

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SHERON WALTERS, Plaintiff, 23-CV-7782 (LTS) -against- ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATION AND AN CITY OF NEW YORK, ORIGINAL SIGNATURE Defendant.

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is currently detained at the George R. Vierno Center on Rikers Island, brings this action pro se. As set forth in this order, the Court directs Plaintiff to either pay the $402.00 in filing fees, or submit the attached prisoner authorization. The Court also directs Plaintiff to submit the attached signature page.

DISCUSSION Plaintiff brings this new civil action, asserting claims that he had asserted in a prior action filed in this court. See Walters v. City of New York, ECF 1:21-CV-2880, 2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2022) (“Walters I”). He states in this new action that he “is refiling all claims made in the matter of Walters v. City of New York, 21-CV-2880 (GHW) [citation omitted] (S.D.N.Y. April 26, 2021).” In Walters I, the Honorable Gregory H. Woods dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with numerous court orders. See id. (Doc. No. 50.) Following this dismissal, Plaintiff moved for reconsideration, and Judge Woods denied the motion on January 12, 2023, noting that the dismissal order did “not bar [Plaintiff] from refiling any timely claims in compliance with court rules and orders.” See id. (Doc No. 53, at 3.) Plaintiff now brings this new action, seeking to refile the claims asserted in Walters I.

A. Prisoner Authorization To proceed with this new civil action, Plaintiff must either pay $402.00 in fees – a $350.00 filing fee plus a $52.00 administrative fee – or, to request authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees, submit a signed IFP application and a prisoner authorization. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915. If the Court grants Plaintiff’s IFP application, the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires the Court to collect the $350.00 filing fee in installments deducted from the Plaintiff’s prison account. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Should Plaintiff seek to proceed in this Court without prepayment of fees, he must authorize the Court to withdraw these payments from his account by filing a “prisoner authorization,” which directs the facility where Plaintiff is incarcerated to deduct the $350.00 filing fee1 from his account in installments and to send to the Court certified copies of his account statements for the past six months. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2), (b).

Plaintiff submitted the complaint without the filing fees or a completed prisoner authorization. Within thirty days of the date of this order, Plaintiff must either pay the $402.00 in fees or submit the attached prisoner authorization. If Plaintiff submits the prisoner authorization, it should be labeled with docket number 23-CV-7782 (LTS).2 B. Original Signature Plaintiff submitted the complaint without a signature. Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed The $52.00 administrative fee for filing a civil action does not apply to persons granted IFP status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

2 Plaintiff is cautioned that if a prisoner files an action that is dismissed as frivolous or for failing to state a claim, the dismissal is a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). A prisoner who receives three “strikes” cannot file actions in forma pauperis as a prisoner, unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury, and must pay the filing fee at the time of filing any new action. by at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s name – or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented.” See also Local Civil Rule 11.1(a). The Supreme Court has interpreted Rule 11(a) to require “as it did in John Hancock’s day, a name handwritten (or a mark handplaced).” Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 764 (2001).

Plaintiff is directed to submit the signature page of the complaint with an original signature to the Court within thirty days of the date of this order. A copy of the signature page is attached to this order.

The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444–45 (1962) (holding that appellant demonstrates good faith when seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue).

SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 5, 2023 New York, New York /s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge