Donnay v. Phillips
1:25-cv-05262
| S.D.N.Y. | Jun 27, 2025Background
- Dominique Francis Donnay, Sr., currently detained at Westchester County Jail, filed a pro se civil rights complaint against several corrections officers and sergeants.
- The case was filed in the Southern District of New York and assigned docket number 25-CV-5262 (LTS).
- Donnay submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) but did not include the required prisoner authorization form.
- Payment of either the $405 filing fee or submission of the signed prisoner authorization form is necessary for all prisoner litigants seeking IFP status, as per 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915.
- The Prison Litigation Reform Act mandates that prisoners granted IFP have the filing fee withdrawn from their account in installments.
- The court has not yet issued a summons and warns that failure to comply within thirty days will result in dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Must the plaintiff submit a prisoner authorization to proceed IFP? | Plaintiff submitted IFP application only | Not addressed | Plaintiff must either pay filing fee or submit authorization |
| Will the case proceed without fee or authorization? | Plaintiff may believe application suffices | Not addressed | No, compliance required within 30 days or dismissal |
| Does the court grant IFP status for purpose of appeal? | Not specifically argued | Not addressed | IFP status for appeal is denied as not in good faith |
| What happens if rules under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) are not followed? | Not directly argued | Not addressed | Plaintiff may accrue a strike; 3 strikes bars IFP filing |
Key Cases Cited
- Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962) (explains standards for an appeal taken in good faith in the IFP context)