Rivera v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Services, 91 N.Y.2d 698 (1998)
In New York, a legal document is considered “filed” only when it is physically received by the court clerk, not when a pro se prisoner delivers it to prison officials for mailing, although CPLR 1101(f) provides a special procedure for indigent inmates.
Summary
Rivera, a pro se prison inmate, attempted to file an Article 78 proceeding by delivering the required documents to prison officials for mailing before the statute of limitations expired. However, the papers reached the court clerk after the deadline. Rivera argued for a “mailbox rule” similar to the federal rule in Houston v. Lack, where filing occurred upon delivery to prison officials. The New York Court of Appeals rejected this argument, holding that under CPLR 304, filing requires actual receipt by the court clerk. However, the court clarified that CPLR 1101(f) allows commencement upon assignment of an index number after submission of a poor person relief application, even if the order to show cause is unsigned.
Facts
Rivera, a pro se inmate, sought to challenge a disciplinary determination.
He delivered his proposed order to show cause, verified Article 78 petition, and request to proceed as a poor person to prison authorities five days before the statute of limitations expired.
He requested certified mail, authorizing the deduction of postage from his account.
The papers were mailed by the prison business office and received by the court clerk two days after the statute of limitations deadline.
Procedural History
Rivera filed a CPLR Article 78 proceeding.
The respondent moved to dismiss the proceeding as time-barred.
Supreme Court granted the motion and dismissed the proceeding.
The Appellate Division affirmed.
The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal.
Issue(s)
Whether a pro se prisoner’s delivery of legal papers to prison officials for mailing constitutes “filing” under CPLR 304 for the purpose of commencing a legal proceeding and satisfying the statute of limitations.
Holding
No, because CPLR 304 defines filing as delivery to the clerk of the court, and the Legislature’s intent is that filing occurs upon actual receipt by the clerk, but CPLR 1101(f) changes the general rule by allowing for filing before a judge signs the order to show cause, upon assignment of an index number after submission of a poor person relief application.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals rejected the prisoner “mailbox rule” argument, distinguishing Houston v. Lack based on the Court’s limited authority to interpret the CPLR, which consists of legislative statutory provisions. The court reasoned that the statutory language of CPLR 304 and 306-a requires an immediate temporal link between the litigant’s physical act of filing, the court’s date stamping of the filed papers, and the assignment of an index number, which demonstrated the Legislature’s intent that papers are