Summary
This memorandum and order from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York addresses a pro se plaintiff's repeated failure to pay filing fees or demonstrate indigency for a § 1983 civil rights action. After multiple extensions and returned mail indicating the plaintiff could not be reached, the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice. Additionally, the court certified that any potential appeal would not be taken in good faith, denying in forma pauperis status for appellate review.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the complaint should be dismissed without prejudice after Plaintiff failed to pay the filing fee or demonstrate that he was unable to pay despite repeated court orders.
- Whether Plaintiff should be denied in forma pauperis status for purposes of any appeal because an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Holdings
- A pro se complaint may be dismissed without prejudice when the plaintiff fails to pay the required filing fee or demonstrate inability to pay after being given repeated opportunities to comply with court orders.
- In forma pauperis status must be denied for purposes of an appeal when the district court certifies that the appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Factual background
Tobias Darden filed a pro se civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and sought to proceed in forma pauperis. He reported having $7,000 in a savings or checking account, did not establish that he was unable to pay the filing fee, and failed to pay after receiving multiple opportunities to do so or to submit an amended IFP application. A court mailing was returned as undeliverable, and Plaintiff did not otherwise comply with the court's orders.
Procedural history
The court initially denied Plaintiff's IFP request because he reported having approximately $7,000 in a savings or checking account and had not shown that he could not pay the filing fee. The court later granted additional and final extensions to pay the fee or submit an amended IFP application. Plaintiff did not comply, and mail sent to him was returned as undeliverable. The court dismissed the action without prejudice and directed the Clerk to close the case and mail the order to Plaintiff's last known address.