Santana v. The Warden of G.R.V.C. et al
Filing
55
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court received a letter dated December 3, 2015 from the plaintiff advising the Court that the Great Meadow Correctional Facility, where the plaintiff now resides, is continuing to collect the plaintiffs filing fee an d will not reimburse him, even though the plaintiff has settled the case favorably with the defendants and the Court discontinued the case with prejudice but without costs on September 28, 2015. Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion to instruct his facility to refund his filing fee or stop collecting it from his account is denied. (As further set forth in this order). (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 12/11/2015) (cf)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
────────────────────────────────────
FERNANDO SANTANA,
Plaintiff,
- against -
14cv5988 (JGK)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND
ORDER
THE WARDEN OF GRVC, ET AL.,
Defendants.
────────────────────────────────────
JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge:
The Court received a letter dated December 3, 2015 from the
plaintiff advising the Court that the Great Meadow Correctional
Facility, where the plaintiff now resides, is continuing to
collect the plaintiff’s filing fee and will not reimburse him,
even though the plaintiff has settled the case favorably with
the defendants and the Court discontinued the case with
prejudice but without costs on September 28, 2015.
The
plaintiff moves the Court to instruct his facility to refund his
filing fee or to stop collecting it from his account.
Previously, the Court granted the plaintiff’s application
to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), which allows the plaintiff
to pay the filing fee in installments. 1
1
See 28 U.S.C.
The initial partial filing fee is 20 percent of the greater of
– (A) the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account; or
(B) the average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for
the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the
complaint. 28 U.S.C § 1915(b)(1)(A).
§ 1915(b)(1).
Under the law, the Court must collect, when funds
exist in a prisoner’s account, an initial partial filing fee
plus monthly payments.
The agency having custody of the
prisoner forwards those payments from the prisoner’s account to
the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the account exceeds
$10, until the filing fees are paid.
See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(2); see also In the Matter of the Prison Litigation
Reform Act, Second Amended Standing Order, M10-468 (S.D.N.Y. May
26, 2010) (requiring agencies to calculate and remit the
statutory fees for litigants in their custody).
The discontinuance of the action does not excuse
plaintiff’s responsibility to pay the filing fee in
installments, nor does it authorize the Court to order a refund
of the filing fee.
“[A] party proceeding in forma pauperis is
required to pay the full $350.00 filing fee, regardless of the
outcome of the action.”
Gasaway v. Perdue, No. 9:11cv01272
(LEK), 2012 WL 1952644, at *2 (N.D.N.Y. May 30, 2012); see also
Goins v. DeCaro, 241 F.3d 260, 262 (2d Cir. 2001) (inmate who
withdraws his appeal is not entitled to a refund of the filing
fee paid or a cancellation of the remaining indebtedness);
Williams v. Roberts, 116 F.3d 1126, 1127–28 (5th Cir. 1997)
(plain language of the PLRA requires court to assess filing fees
once matter is filed, regardless of ultimate outcome of
proceeding) (per curiam) (citations omitted); accord Arzuaga v.
2
Quiros, 781 F.3d 29, 34 (2d Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (IFP statute
does not “excuse any obligation to pay those [filing] fees.
Instead, the statute requires prisoners to pay the entire filing
fee in installments deducted from their prisoner trust
accounts.”).
Accordingly, the plaintiff’s motion to instruct his
facility to refund his filing fee or to stop collecting it from
his account is denied.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:
New York, New York
December 11, 2015
____________/s/_______________
John G. Koeltl
United States District Judge
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?