Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_16-cv-00133/USCOURTS-almd-2_16-cv-00133-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

JAMES BROADHEAD, #224 802, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-133-WHA

) [WO]

CORRECTIONAL LPN BATTLE, )

et al., )

)

Defendants. )

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

I. INTRODUCTION

This case is before the court on a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint filed by James M. 

Broadhead, a frequent federal litigant incarcerated at the Donaldson Correctional Facility in 

Bessemer, Alabama. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, a prisoner may not bring a civil action or proceed 

on appeal in forma pauperis if he “has, on 3 or more 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.”

1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

I. DISCUSSION

Upon initiating this case, Broadhead did not pay the $350 filing fee or $50 administrative 

																																																												 1 In Rivera v. Allin, 144 F.3d 719, 731 (1998), the Court determined that the “three strikes” provision of 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which requires frequent filer prisoner indigents to prepay the entire filing fee before 

federal courts may consider their cases and appeals, “does not violate the First Amendment right to access 

the courts; the separation of judicial and legislative powers; the Fifth Amendment right to due process of 

law; or the Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection, as incorporated through the Fifth 

Amendment.” In Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 216 (2007), the Supreme Court abrogated Rivera but only 

to the extent it compelled an inmate to plead exhaustion of remedies in his complaint as “failure to 

exhaust is an affirmative defense under the PLRA . . . and inmates are not required to specifically plead or 

demonstrate exhaustion in their complaints.”

Case 2:16-cv-00133-WHA-GMB Document 2 Filed 03/08/16 Page 1 of 5
2

fee, nor did he apply for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. In cases with these deficiencies, the 

usual practice of this court is to enter an order advising Plaintiff he must pay the full filing fee 

and concomitant administrative fee or apply for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Under the 

directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), however, a prisoner may not bring a civil action or proceed on 

appeal in forma pauperis if he “has, on 3 or more 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.” Consequently, an 

inmate in violation of the “three strikes” provision of § 1915(g) who is not in “imminent danger”

of suffering a serious physical injury must pay the filing fee upon initiation of his case. Dupree v. 

Palmer, 284 F.3d 1234, 1236 (11th Cir. 2002). 

Federal court records establish that Broadhead, while incarcerated or detained, has on at 

least four occasions had civil actions dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 as frivolous, malicious, 

for failure to state a claim, or for asserting claims against defendants immune from suit.2 The 

actions on which this court relies in finding a § 1915(g) violation by Broadhead are: (1) 

Broadhead v. Dozier, et al., Case No. 2:11-CV-489-MEF-TFM (M.D. Ala.) (complaint 

malicious); (2) Broadhead v. O’Brian, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-475-JHH-RRA (N.D. Ala.) 

(complaint frivolous); (3) Broadhead v. Hopkins, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-439-LSC-RRA (N.D. 

Ala.) (complaint frivolous); and (4) Broadhead v. Kirrire, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-53-VEHRRA (N.D. Ala.) (complaint frivolous). 

Upon review of the present complaint and the numerous other civil actions filed by 

																																																												 2 This court may take judicial notice of its own records and the records of other federal courts. Nguyen v. 

United States, 556 F.3d 1244, 1259 n.7 (11th Cir. 2009); United States v. Rey, 811 F.2d 1453, 1457 n.5 

(11th Cir. 1987); United States v. Glover, 179 F.3d 1300, 1302 n.5 (11th Cir. 1999).

Case 2:16-cv-00133-WHA-GMB Document 2 Filed 03/08/16 Page 2 of 5
3

Broadhead in this and the other federal courts of this state alleging a similar factual basis for 

relief,3 the court finds Broadhead fails to demonstrate that he “is under imminent danger of 

serious physical injury” as required to meet the exception allowing circumvention of the 

directives in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Medberry v. Butler, 185 F.3d 1189, 1193 (11th Cir. 1999) 

(holding that a prisoner who has filed three or more frivolous lawsuits or appeals and seeks to 

proceed in forma pauperis must present facts sufficient to demonstrate “imminent danger” to 

circumvent application of the “three strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)); Lewis v. 

Sullivan, 279 F.3d 526, 531 (7th Cir. 2002) (noting that the imminent danger exception is 

available only “[w]hen a threat or prison condition is real and proximate, and when the potential 

consequence is ‘serious physical injury’”). Thus, even if the court were to grant Broadhead in 

forma pauperis status, he could not proceed with this action due to his violation of the “three 

strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Based on the foregoing, the court concludes this case is due to be summarily dismissed 

																																																												 3 A review of the records for this court and the other federal courts of this state show Broadhead has filed 

numerous cases alleging claims of excessive force and asserting injuries similar to those set forth in this 

complaint. See Broadhead v. Hicks, et al., Case No. 2:12-CV-2369-JHH-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. 

Price, et al., Case No. 2:12-CV-2193-IPJ-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Byres, et al., Case No. 4:12-

CV-644-KOB-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Baker, et al., Case No. 4:12-CV-585-SLB-RRA (N.D. 

Ala.); Broadhead v. Norris, et al., Case No. 2:11-CV-490-MEF-TFM (M.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Dozier, 

et al., Case No. 2:11-CV-489-MEF-TFM (M.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Woodard, et al., Case No. 2:11-CV341-MEF-TFM (M.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Scott, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-1152-WMA-RRA (N.D. Ala.); 

Broadhead v. Carter, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-1142-AKK-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Miles, et al., 

Case No. 4:10-CV-1141-JHH-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Scott, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-1028-

AKK-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Malone, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-806-JHH-RRA (N.D. Ala.); 

Broadhead v. McKay, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-751-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. O’Brian, et al., 

Case No. 4:10-CV-475-JHH-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Hopkins, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-439-

LSC-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Wise, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-388-IPJ-RRA (N.D. Ala.); 

Broadhead v. Brown, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-350-VEH-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Swain, et al., 

Case No. 4:10-CV-113-AKK-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Richburg, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-54-IPJRRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Kirrire, et al., Case No. 4:10-CV-53-VEH-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead 

v. Swain, et al., Case No. 4:09-CV-2606-SLB-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Northcutt, et al., Case No. 

4:09-CV-2512-SLB-RRA (N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Michael, et al., Case No. 4:09-CV-2473-VEH-RRA 

(N.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Griggs, et al., Case No. 1:10-CV-241-CG-C (S.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Heinz, 

et al., Case No. 1:10-CV-129-KD-B (S.D. Ala.); Broadhead v. Mixon, et al., Case No. 1:10-CV-12-WS-C 

(S.D. Ala.). 

Case 2:16-cv-00133-WHA-GMB Document 2 Filed 03/08/16 Page 3 of 5
4

without prejudice because Broadhead failed to pay the requisite filing and administrative fees 

upon initiation of this case. Dupree, 284 F.3d at 1236 (“[T]he proper procedure is for the district 

court to dismiss the complaint without prejudice when [an inmate is not entitled] to proceed in 

forma pauperis [due] to [a violation of] the provisions of § 1915(g)” because the prisoner “must 

pay the filing fee at the time he initiates the suit.”); Vanderberg v. Donaldson, 259 F.3d 1321, 

1324 (11th Cir. 2001) (same). 

II. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge this case be 

DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing and administrative fees 

upon his initiation of this case.

It is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 1) is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that on or before March 22, 2016, Plaintiff may file an 

objection to the Recommendation. Any objection filed must specifically identify the factual 

findings and legal conclusions in the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation to which Plaintiff

objects. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court.

This Recommendation is not a final order and, therefore, it is not appealable.

Failure to file a written objection to the proposed findings and recommendations in the 

Magistrate Judge’s report shall bar a party from a de novo determination by the District Court of 

factual findings and legal issues covered in the report and shall “waive the right to challenge on 

appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions” except 

upon grounds of plain error if necessary in the interests of justice. 11th Cir. R. 3-1; see 

Resolution Trust Co. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993); Henley v. 

Case 2:16-cv-00133-WHA-GMB Document 2 Filed 03/08/16 Page 4 of 5
5

Johnson, 885 F.2d 790, 794 (11th Cir. 1989).

DONE on this 8th day of March, 2016.

 /s/ Gray M. Borden 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:16-cv-00133-WHA-GMB Document 2 Filed 03/08/16 Page 5 of 5