From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Andrews v. Johnson

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Dec 20, 2021
21-CV-10726 (LTS) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 20, 2021)

Opinion

21-CV-10726 (LTS)

12-20-2021

CARL ANDREWS, Plaintiff, v. JAMES JOHNSON; DANIEL H. WOLF; KEVIN KEATING; BENJAMIN SHRIER; RUSHMI BHASKARAN; JUDGE ENGELMAYER; SUSAN KELLMAN; IZRA SPILKE, Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:

Plaintiff Carl Andrews, who is currently detained in the Suffolk County Correctional Facility, brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that he was maliciously prosecuted in this court. The Court dismisses the complaint for the following reasons.

Plaintiff has previously submitted to this Court a substantially similar complaint asserting similar claims. That case is presently pending before this Court under docket number 21-CV-8310. As this complaint raises similar claims, no useful purpose would be served by litigating this duplicate lawsuit. Therefore, this complaint is dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff's pending case under docket number 21-CV-8310.

If Plaintiff wishes to amend his complaint to add additional claims or additional defendants, he may request leave to file an amended complaint in that case. Plaintiff must be sure to label his submissions with docket number 21-CV-8310 (LT S).

In light of the Court's belief that Plaintiff may have submitted this duplicate complaint in error, the Clerk of Court shall not charge Plaintiff the $350.00 filing fee for this action, and the Warden or Superintendent having custody of Plaintiff shall not deduct or encumber funds from Plaintiff's prison trust account for this lawsuit.

CONCLUSION

Plaintiff is granted in forma pauperis (IFP) status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) for the limited purpose of dismissing this complaint without prejudice.

Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed as duplicative.

The Clerk of Court shall not charge Plaintiff the $350.00 filing fee for this action.

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 IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Andrews v. Johnson

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Dec 20, 2021
21-CV-10726 (LTS) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 20, 2021)
Case details for

Andrews v. Johnson

Case Details

Full title:CARL ANDREWS, Plaintiff, v. JAMES JOHNSON; DANIEL H. WOLF; KEVIN KEATING…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Dec 20, 2021

Citations

21-CV-10726 (LTS) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 20, 2021)