Keyes v. County Court et al

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM & ORDER denying 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; Plaintiff's applications to proceed in forma pauperis are DENIED as to all of the New Complaints. Accordingly, Plaintiff is DIRECTED to pay the $350 filing f ee for each of the New Complaints within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order. The Court certifies pursuant to 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 any appeal. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 6/6/2017. C/M (Valle, Christine)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------X
KEYSEAN L. KEYES,
Plaintiff,
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
17-CV-00692(JS)(SIL)

-againstWILLIAM HESS, et al.,
Defendants.
----------------------------------X
KEYSEAN L. KEYES,
Plaintiff
-against-

17-CV-0696(JS)(SIL)

COUNTY COURT, Nassau County,
et al.,
Defendants.
----------------------------------X
KEYSEAN L. KEYES,
Plaintiff,
-against-

17-CV-1059(JS)(SIL)

JOHN SARCONE, et al.,
Defendants.
----------------------------------X
KEYSEAN L. KEYES,
Plaintiff,
-againstWINTHROP UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL,
et al.,
Defendants.
----------------------------------X

17-CV-1060(JS)(SIL)

----------------------------------X
KEYSEAN L. KEYES,
Plaintiff,
-against-

17-CV-1061(JS)(SIL)

COUNTY COURT, Supreme Court,
et al.
Defendants.
----------------------------------X
APPEARANCES
For Plaintiff:
Keysean L. Keyes
P.O. Box 1812
Mineola, New York 11501
For Defendants:

No appearances.

SEYBERT, District Judge:
Incarcerated

pro

se

plaintiff

Keysean

L.

Keyes

(“Plaintiff”) filed five (5) Complaints in this Court during the
period February 1, 2017 through February 27, 2017 (the “New
Complaints”).

In each case, Plaintiff filed an application to

proceed in forma pauperis.

Plaintiff has already had at least

three in forma pauperis complaints sua sponte dismissed for failure
to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), 1915A(b)(1).

See 16-CV-4016,

Keyes

v. Nassau Cty. Ct. and Sup. Ct., et al.; 16-CV-4989, Keyes v.
Sullivan; 16-CV-5482, Keyes v. Nassau Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, et al.;
16-CV-5483, Keyes v. Nassau Cty. Corr. Facility, et al.; 16-CV5484, Keyes v. The District Att’y, et al.; 16-CV-5485, Keyes v.
The People of the State of N.Y., and 16-5486, Keyes v. Sullivan,

all

of

which

have

been

dismissed

pursuant

to

28

U.S.C.

§§

1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b).1
The Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g),
provides:
In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil
action or appeal a judgment in a civil action
or proceeding [in forma pauperis] if the
prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions,
while
incarcerated
or
detained
in
any
facility, brought an action or appeal in a
court of the United States that was dismissed
on the grounds that it is frivolous,
malicious, or fails to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted, unless the
prisoner is under imminent danger of serious
physical injury.
Here, Plaintiff has not alleged that she is in “imminent
danger of serious physical injury” in any of the New Complaints.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
1

Accordingly, because Plaintiff has on

The Court notes that Plaintiff filed an additional fourteen
(14) in forma pauperis complaints during the period October 5,
2016 through November 10, 2016. (See 16-CV-5747, Keyes v. Armor
Corr. Health, et al.; 16-CV-5752, Keyes v. Nassau Cty. Ct., et
al.; 16-CV-5753, Keyes v. Federal Dist. Ct., EDNY, et al.; 16-CV5755, Keyes v. Michael Sposato, et al.; 16-CV-5757, Keyes v.
Judge David Sullivan, et al.; 16-CV-5990, Keyes v. Michael
Sposato, et al., 16-CV-5991, Keyes v. Nassau Cty. Sheriff’s
Dep’t, et al.; 16-CV-5992, Keyes v. Nassau Cty. Sup. Ct., et al.;
16-CV-5993, Keyes v. Edward Mangano; 16-CV-5994, Keyes v. David
Sullivan; 16-CV-5995, Keyes v. Nassau Cty. Ct., et al.; 16-CV6226, Keyes v. Judge David Sullivan, et al.; 16-CV-6310, Keyes v.
Judge David Sullivan, et al.; and 16-CV-6311, Keyes v. The Dep’t
of Social Svcs.) By Order dated December 30, 2016 in each case,
the Court denied Plaintiff’s applications to proceed in forma
pauperis because Plaintiff had already accumulated three strikes
and was thus barred from proceeding in forma pauperis.
Each
case has since been dismissed for failure to prosecute because
Plaintiff did not remit the Court’s filing fee. See Order, dated
March 28, 2017 in each of the above cases.

three prior occasions “brought an action or appeal in a court of
the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is
frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted,” and has not alleged that she is “under imminent
danger of serious physical injury,” her applications to proceed in
forma pauperis are DENIED as to all of the New Complaints.
U.S.C. § 1915(g).

28

Accordingly, Plaintiff is DIRECTED to pay the

$350 filing fee for each of the New Complaints within fourteen (14)
days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, failure to do so
will lead to the dismissal of her claims without further notice,
and judgment shall enter in each case.

Plaintiff is advised that

payment of the filing fee does not exempt her from the requirements
of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and that the Court is required to dismiss a
complaint if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief
against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

See

§§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii) and 1915A(a)-(b).

[BOTTOM OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

28 U.S.C.

The Court certifies pursuant to 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
any appeal.

See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45,

82 S. Ct. 917, 8 L. Ed. 2d 21 (1962).

SO ORDERED.
/s/ JOANNA SEYBERT
Joanna Seybert, U.S.D.J.
Dated:

June
6
, 2017
Central Islip, New York