FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT January 3, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 13273 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 5 7 0 - CV - O RL- 1 8 - K RS T H O M A S G E O R G E H Y L A N D , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s J A C K P A R K E R , S h e r if f , B r e v a r d C o u n ty , L I S A S . P A T R I C K , M a jo r , P A T R I C I A T I P T O N , S e r g e a n t, C H A R M A I N E C . R E P A S S , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lle e s .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( J a nua ry 3, 2006)2

B efo re T JO F L A T , B IR C H an d C A RN E S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: T hom a s G e or ge H y l a nd appe a l s the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s s uas pont e di s m i s s a l of hi s i n f orm apaupe r i s ( “ I F P ” ) a nd pr o s e 42 U . S . C . § 1983 c om pl a i nta l l e gi ng the vi ol at i on of hi s c on st i tut i on al ri gh tof ac ce ss t o cou rt s. A ft erH yl and h ad am ended hi s c om pl a i nt , butbe f

or e the de f

e nda nt s ha d be e n s e rve d, the di s tr i c tc ourts ua s p o n t e d i s mi s s e d H y l a n d ’ s a me n d e d c o mp l a i n ta s f r i v o l o u s u n d e rb o th 2 8 U . S. C. §§ 1915A ( b) a nd 1915( e ) . F i ndi ng tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de c i s i on t o di s m i s s the c o m p l a i n twa s e rr o n e o u s a n d a n ab u s e o f d i s c r e t i o n , we VA C AT E a n d R E MAND f orf urthe rpr oc e e di ngs c ons i s t e ntw i th thi s opi ni on. I . B AC KG RO UN D O n 18 A pr i l 2005, H y l a nd s ubm i tt e d hi s i ni t i a l c i vi l r i ght s c om pl a i ntt o the U n i t ed S t at es D i stri ctC o u rtfo r th e M i d d l e D i stri cto f F l o ri d a, al o n g w i th a req u est for l ea ve t o p roce ed i n form a pauperi s ( “ IF P ”) . H e nam ed four offi ci al s a s de f e nda nt s : S he r i f

f J a c k P a rke r , S he r i f

f of B r e va r d C ounty , F l or i da , w ho he a l l e ge d r a n the B r e va r d C ounty D e t e nt i on C e nt e r( “ c e nt e r ” ) a nd pr ovi de d f ora nd approv ed the ce nt er ’ s pol i cyand p roce du re s; M aj or L i saS . P atri ck, w ho he al l eged w as re spon si bl e f

or the day t o d ayop er at i on s of the ce nt er , i ncl ud i ng the po l i ci es a nd pr oc e dur e s of

the L e ga l M a t e r i a l s D e pa rtm e nt( “ l e ga l de pa rtm e nt ” ) ; S e r ge a ntHy land e xplaine d in

hisc omp laint

that th e se“materi als [w ere ] only [made ] av aila

bleto 1 [hi m] strictly

relating to [this] complaint presently .” R1-1 at 13. 3 P a tr i c i aT i pt on, w ho he a l l e ge d w a s the s upe rvi s orof the l e ga l de pa rtm e nt ; a nd C h a rm a n e C . R e p a s s , w h o h e a lle g e d w a s th e c le rko f th e le g a l d e p a rtm e n t. Hy l a n d a l l e g e d th a th e wa s tr a n s f e rr e d t o th e c e n t e ro n 2 0 Ma r c h 2 0 0 5 . He further a l l eged that , atthatt i m e, he w as a pro se party i n fou r di ff er entl egal ac t i on s: three ci vi l sui t s bef ore the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rtfor the S ou thern D i s tr i c tof

F l or i da , a nd one be f

or e the F l or i daT hi r d D i s tr i c tC ourtof A ppe a l . T he day a ft erH yl and arri ved atthe ce nt er , he st art ed w orki ng on these ca se s and began m a k in g r e q u e s ts o f

th e au th o r itie s th e r e . I n hi s c om pl a i nt , H y l a nd s t a t e d tha tthe c e nt e rw a s de ny i ng hi m a c c e s s t o the court s i n fou r w ay s: (1) by r ef usi ng hi m pens, paper, and p ost age, w hi ch he needed fo r ch an g e o f ad d ress n o t i ces an d ap p eal s i n th e fo u r l aw su i t s t o w h i ch h e w as a p a rty ; ( 2 ) b y r e f

u s in g to g iv e h im a n y le g a l r e s e a r c h m a te r ia ls to w o rkf r o m o n h is fo u r p en d i n g cases; (3 ) b y refu si n g t o g i v e h i m th e ad d resses o f th e co u rt s, a tt orne y s , a nd l e ga l or ga ni z a t i ons ne c e s s a ry t o pa rt i c i pa t e i n hi s pe ndi ng c a s e s ; a nd (4) by m ai nt ai ni ng the l egal departm enton l y a s a“ ci t e/ dem and” res ou rc e, i nst ea d o f as a l aw l i b rary. 1 A f t e rthe c e nt e ri nf

orm e d hi m tha the ha d e xhaus t e d the pr oc e s s of gr i e va nc e s a nd appe a l s , H y l a nd, i n hi s i ni t i a l di s tr i c tc ourtc om pl a i nt , de s c r i be d the4

f ourc a s e s , i nc l udi ng the i rc urr e nts t a tus a nd ne c e s s a ry f i l i ngs , a nd the r e s ul t a nt in ju r ie s s u f

f e r e d b y h is la c ko f

a c c e s s to m a te r ia ls a n d r e s e a r c h . S p e c if ic a lly , in hi s f i r s tc a s e , he e xpe c t e d a n or de ron ade f e nda nt ’ s m ot i on t o di s m i s s , w hi c h he w oul d notr e c e i ve i f

he c oul d notc ha nge hi s a ddr e s s . T he r e f or e , he w oul d notbe ab le to g o o n to d is c o v e ry o rap p e a l r e g a r d le s s o f th e o r d e r ’s c o n te n t. I n h is se cond ca se , he needed t o b e abl e t o stud y the rul es of appel l at e procedure i n o rder t o f i l e abr i e f

w i th ourc i r c ui t , a nd he f a c e d f or f e i tur e i f he c oul d notm e e tthe deadl i nes. In hi s thi rd ca se , he needed t o b e abl e t o com m un i ca t e w i th the court re gardi ng a s t i pu l at ed agree m ent , w hi ch he coul d n otdo w i tho utthe re qu es t ed r e s o u r c e s . F i nal l y, H yl and al l eged that , i n h i s f ou rth cas e, before the F l ori da T hi rd D is tr ic t C o u rt o f

A p p e a l, h e h a d a lr e a d y m is s e d h is d e a d lin e to s u p p le m e n t h is in itia l b r ie f

w ith th e tr a n s c r ip ts o f

th e h e a r in g b e c au s e h e h a d n o t b e e n a llo w e d to c o n ta c t th e c o u rt r e p o rte rto g e t th e tr a n s c r ip ts a n d h e h a d n o t b e e n a llo w e d to c o n ta c t th e c o u rt. H e w a s a ls o p r e v e n te df r o m r e s e a r c h in g th e la w g o v e rn in g h is c a s e . F u rth e r , h e c o n te n d e dth a t th e A tto rn e y G e n e r a l o f th e S ta te o f

F lo r id aw o u ld b e sen d i n g h i m a co p y o f h i s resp o n se b ri ef, b u ti tw o u l d g o t o th e w ro n g ad d ress b e c au s e h e h a d n o t b e e n a llo w e d th e n e c e s s a ry p e n s , p ap e r , a n d p o s ta g e to c o m m u n ic a te w ith th e s ta te .5

H y l a nd e xpl a i ne d tha ttw o of the f e de r a l c a s e s w e r e c i vi l r i ght s a c t i ons , a nd a l l f ourw e r e r e l a t e d t o the appe a l be f or e the F l or i dac ourt . H y l a nd s ought im m e d ia te in

ju n c tiv e r e lie f

in th e f o rm o f an o r d e rth a t th e d e f

e n d a n ts im m e d ia te ly “s up p ly [ h im ] w ith h is n e e d s o f p r o s e in d ig e n t le g a l s u p p lie s ” a n d a llo w h im to w ork on hi s f

ourc a s e s w i th f

ul l a c c e s s t o the de pa rtm e nt ’ s r e s our c e s , i nc l udi ng l eg al ad d resses. R 1 -1 at1 9 -2 0 . H e al so so u g h tm o n et ary d am ag es. O n 2 5 A p r il 2 0 0 5 , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d e n ie d o n e o f H y la n d ’s m o tio n s , in w hi ch he soug hta t em po raryre stra i ni ng order, expl ai ni ng thatH yl and h ad nei ther com pl i ed w i th the appl i cabl e rul es re gardi ng such a f i l i ng , no r had he “ conv i nced the [ c ] ourttha tthe r e i s as ubs t a nt i a l l i ke l i hood tha the w i l l pr e va i l on the m e r i t s ” or

“ thatthere exi st s asubst ant i al threa tthathe w i l l suff eri rr epar abl e i nj ury. ” R 1-8 at 2. T ha ts a m e da y , the di s tr i c tc ourte nt e r e d a n or de rs t a t i ng tha tbe c aus e H y l a nd had “ fa i l ed t o setforth h i s c l ai m adequat el y, he [w ou l d] be re qu i re d t o sub m i tan a m e nde d c om pl a i nt . ” R 1- 9 a t1. T he or de rw e nton t o de s c r i be how H y l a nd s houl d, a m ong othe rthi ngs : ( 1) onl y na m e de f e nda nt s w ho w e r e r e s pons i bl e f or a l l e ge d c ons t i tut i ona l vi ol a t i ons ; ( 2) s t a t e w ha tr i ght s ha d be e n vi ol a t e d a nd su p p o rth i s cl ai m s w i th fact s; (3 ) “ d escri b e h o w each n am ed d efen d an t[w as] i nvol ve d i n the a l l e ge d c ons t i tut i ona l vi ol a t i on( s ) ” ; ( 4) “ s how s pe c i f i c a l l y how he h a [ d ] b e e n d a m a g e d ” ; ( 5 ) c o m p ly w ith 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 9 7 e ( a ) a n d ( e ) a s to6

e xhaus t i on of

a dm i ni s tr a t i ve r e m e di e s ; a nd ( 6) “ [ m ] os ti m port a nt l y , i f [ he ] i nt e nds to a lle g e an u m b e ro f

r e la te d c la im s , th e n h e m u s t s e t f o rth e a c h c la im in as e p a r a te pa r a gr aph i n the s a m e c om pl a i nt . H ow e ve r , i f the c l a i m s a r e notr e l a t e d t o the s a m e b a s ic is s u e o rin c id e n t, th e n e a c h c la im m u s t b e a d d r e s s e d in as e p a r a te com pl ai nt . ” I d. at1-3. (e m ph as i s i n o ri gi nal ). O n e d a y la te r , H y la n d f ile d am o tio n to c o m p e l, a s k in g th e d is tr ic t c o u rt to or de rthe de pa rtm e ntt o a l l ow hi m a c c e s s t o ac opy of the L oc a l R ul e s f

orthe U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rtfor the M i dd l e D i stri ctof F l ori da. H yl and exp l ai ned thatthe di stri ctcourthad d es i gn at ed the pres entca se a “ T ra ck O ne” c as e und er L o c a l R u le 3 .0 5 a n d n o tif ie d h im th a t h e n e e d e d to c o m p ly w ith th a t ru le . R 1-11 at 1. H e f urther e xp l ai ned thatw hen h e a sked the departm entfor acopy of the L ocal R u l es, R ep ass resp o n d ed th atth ey w ere u n av ai l ab l e. H yl an d arg u ed th atR ep ass coul d acc es s the rul es on W es t l aw , and ass ert ed thatshe knew thathe re qu i re d ac ce ss t o the rul e t o com pl y w i th the courtorder. T hu s, he as ked the di stri ctcourt to o r d e rth e d e f

e n d a n ts to s u p p ly h im w ith ac o p y o f th e L o c a l R u le s . T h e n ex t d ay , th e d istrict co u rt d en ied H ylan d ’s m o ti o n , ex p lain in g th at “[a]t th is ju n c tu r e o f

th e p r o c e e d in g s , n o [ d ]e f e n d an t h a s b e e n s e rv e d w ith p r o c e s s in thi s c a s e , a nd, s i nc e [ p] l a i nt i f f w i l l be f i l i ng an a m e nde d c om pl a i nt. . . i ti s not c le a rth a t th e B r e v a r dC o u n ty D e te n tio n C e n te rw ill b e ap a rty to th is litig a tio n .7

T h u s , it w o u ld b e in ap p r o p r ia te f o rth e C o u rt to g r an t th e m o tio n .” R 1 - 1 2 a t 1 . O n 4 M a y 2005, H y l a nd f i l e d apr o s e a m e nde d c om pl a i nt . W hi l e H y l a nd s i m pl y r e pr oduc e d m uc h of the pe r i phe r a l m a tt e rf

r om the or i gi na l c om pl a i nt , the a m e nde d c om pl a i ntdi d i nc l ude s om e i m port a ntc ha nge s . F i r s t , H y l a nd a dde d a f e w m or e w or ds de s c r i bi ng how the na m e d de f e nda nt s r e pr e s e nt e d the c ha i n of au th o r ity o v e rth e le g a l d e p a rtm e n t’s p o lic ie s a n d p r o c e d u r e s . S ec on d, he re du ce d th e n u m b e ro f

c la im s in h is c o m p la in t f r o m f o u rto o n e , s ta tin g in f

u ll th a t: D e f e n d a n ts a r e v io la tin g p la in tif f’s C o n s titu tio n a l R ig h t o f ‘A c c e s s to C ourt s ’ unde rthe D ue P r oc e s s C l aus e of the 5th A m e ndm e ntt o the U . S . C ons t i tut i on; a nd the D ue P r oc e s s a nd E qua l P r ot e c t i on gua r a nt e e s of

the 14th A m e ndm e nt–E f f e c t i ve l y F or e c l os i ng A c c e s s –by a nd thr ough c om pl e t e l y de ny i ng hi m a c c e s s t o [ the de pa rtm e nt ] f

orpe ndi ng a c t i ons a nd appe a l s i n othe rF e de r a l a nd F l ori da j uri sdi ct i on s; (other than B re vard C ou nty) on w hi ch P l ai nt i ff i s C ou rtO rder ed pro se. R 1 - 1 4 a t 8 , A - 1 . T h is is e s s e n tia lly th e s e c o n d c la im s ta te d in h is in itia l c o m p la in t. H y la n d r e w r o te h is s ta te m e n t o f f a c ts to in c lu d e th e f

a c ts r e le v a n t o n ly to th i s o n e i ssu e. T h ese facts w ere essen t i al l y th e sam e as th o se rel at ed i n th e fi rst c om pl a i nt , w i th af

e w c ha nge s . H e a l l e ge d i n the a m e nde d c om pl a i nttha tw he n he m a de hi s r e que s tf

orr e s e a r c h m a t e r i a l s he “ s pe c i f i c a l l y de s i gna t e d tha tthe m at er i al s w er e f

or [hi s] ci vi l ri gh t s a ct i on s i n the S ou thern D i stri ctand h i s di re ct appeal i n the [F l ori da T hi rd D i stri ctC ou rtof A pp ea l ] . ” R 1-14 at9a. F urther, H y l a nd s t a t e d tha tw he n R e pa s s de ni e d hi s f i r s tr e que s tf

orthe m a t e r i a l s s he8

“ gr ounde d [ the de c i s i on] on he r‘ f ol l ow i ng pol i c y a nd pr oc e dur e s s e tf orth f or[ the de pa rtm e nt ] . ’ ” I d. a t9b. H e a l l e ge d tha tw he n he f i l e d agr i e va nc e on thi s i s s ue he st at ed “ the spec i fi c c as e num bers thatcoul d b e ver i fi ed, and h i gh l i gh t ed the fa ct tha the ne e de d the r e que s t e d l e ga l r e f e r e nc e m a t e r i a l s a s the c a s e s ha d br i e f i ng s c he dul e s , de a dl i ne s , a nd s pe c i f i c t i m e f r a m e s he m us tm e e t . ” I d. T he s t a t e m e nt of fa ct s c on cl ud ed by desc ri bi ng ho w the ce nt erul t i m at el y not i fi ed hi m thatthey w o u ld n o t r e s p o n d to a n y m o r e g r ie v a n c e s r e g a r d in g th e le g a l d e p a rtm e n t. A s t o h i s i nj ury, the m ostsi gn i fi cantchange i n the am ended com pl ai ntw as th a t H y la n d o n ly d is c u s s e d th r e e c a s e s , f a ilin g to m e n tio n th e c a s e lis te d th ir d in hi s or i gi na l c om pl a i nt . H y l a nd a l l e ge d tha tthe de f e nda nt s ’ a c t i ons ha d a l r e a dy re sul t ed i n the di sm i ss al of a c i vi l ri gh t s c as e bef ore our courtbecause he had been u n ab l e t o d o research t o co n t i n u e th e act i o n . F u rth er, i n an o th er ci v i l ri g h t s case b e f o r e th e d is tr ic t c o u rt, h e h a d n o t b e e n ab le to p a rtic ip a te in d is c o v e ry o ra c tiv e ly prosec ut e the ca se . F i nal l y, H yl and al l eged thati n h i s F l ori da st at e c ou rtdi re ct appe a l , he ha d m i s s e d the de a dl i ne t o s uppl e m e nthi s i ni t i a l br i e f be c aus e of

the defe nd ant s’ ac t i on s and w ou l d n otbe abl e t o fi l e are pl y bri ef w i tho utdo i ng further r e s e a r c h . A s f or re l i ef , the am ended com pl ai ntdi d n otexpl i ci t l y s ee k i nj un ct i ve re l i ef , b u trath er an o rd er th atd efen d an t s “ i m m ed i at el y reco g n i ze [H yl an d ’ s] p ro se9

ordered ca se s . . . and al l ow [hi m ] ful l ac ce ss t o [the departm ent ] on these ca se s. ” I d . a t 1 0 . H e a l s o r e s t a t e d hi s r e que s tf orm one t a ry da m a ge s . A l ong w i th the a m e n d e d c o m p la in t, H y la n d f ile d am o tio n f

o rr e c o n s id e r a tio n o f

h is p r e v io u s ly f ile d m o tio n s , in c lu d in g h is r e q u e s t f o rle a v e to p r o c e e d I F P . O n 10 M a y 2005, the di s tr i c tc ourte nt e r e d a n or de rde ny i ng r e c ons i de r a t i on o f i t s e a r l i e ro r d e ra n d d i s mi s s i n g H y l a n d ’ s c o mp l a i n ta s f r i v o l o u s u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. §§ 1915A ( b) a nd 1915( e ) . T he c ourtf i r s tf ound tha tH y l a nd’ s c om pl a i ntdi d not in v o lv e ad e n ia l o f

e ith e r“a n a d e q u a te la w lib r a ry o ra d e q u a te le g a l a s s is ta n c e ,” b u t r a th e rin v o lv e d “ad e n ia l o f a c c e s s to th e p r is o n la w lib r a ry .” R 1 - 1 5 a t 2 n .1 . A s are sul t , the courtfoun d thati thad t o “ det erm i ne w hether [ H yl and] has a l l eged a n a c tua l i nj ury t o c ourta c c e s s . ” I d. “ F ore xa m pl e , [ H y l a nd] m us tpr ovi de e v id e n c e ‘s u c h a s ad e n ia l o rd is m is s a l o f ad ir e c t ap p e a l, h ab e a s p e titio n , o rc iv il r i ght s c a s e tha tr e s ul t s f r om a c t i ons of

pr i s on of

f i c i a l s . ” I d. a t3. T he c ourtf ound thatH yl and h ad “ al l eged no spec i fi c f ac t s s uffi ci entt o rai se an ar gu abl e bas i s f or a f in d in g th a t h e h a s s u f

f e r e d s u c h p r e

ju d ic e a s ar e s u lt o f

[ d ]e f e n d an ts ’ a lle g e d ly i m pr ope rc onduc t . ” I d. A l though the c ourts ugge s t e d tha tapl a i nt i f f’ s a l l e ga t i ons of “ dat es m i ss ed, [an] i nabi l i ty t o m ake t i m el y f i l i ng s, or [the] l oss of aca se w hi ch c oul d ha ve be e n w on” w oul d be nonf r i vol ous , i tappa r e nt l y c onc l ude d tha tH y l a nd h a d n o t m a d e s u c h a lle g a tio n s , b e c au s e it f o u n d th a t h is “a lle g a tio n s w ith r e g a r d to10

the deni al of ac ce ss t o the court s [ w er e] i nsuffi ci entt o w i thst and scrut i ny un der [ s ] e c t i ons 1915A ( b) a nd [ 1915( e ) ] . [ H y l a nd] s i m pl y doe s nots t a t e ac l a i m f or d e n ia l o f a c c e s s to th e c o u rts , a n d th is c a s e m u s t b e d is m is s e d a s f r iv o lo u s .” I d . A l s o on 10 M a y 2005, H y l a nd f i l e d anot i c e of

c ha nge of

a ddr e s s w i th the c ourt , s t a t i ng tha the ha d m ove d t o the C e ntr a l F l or i daR e c e pt i on C e nt e r . O n 17 M a y 2 0 0 5 , H y l a n d f

i l e d as e c o n d mo t i o n f

o rr e c o n s i d e r a t i o n /r e h e a r i n g , th i s t i me re gardi ng the M ay10 di sm i ss al . H e r es po nd ed t o the court ’ s f i nd i ng s, ar gu i ng that hi s c om pl ai nt“ do es st at e tho roug hl y c ert ai n fac t s e st abl i shi ng spec i fi c pre j ud i ce . ” R 1- 17 a t2. H e a r gue d tha tthe c om pl a i nts how e d a n “ abs ol ut e de pr i va t i on of ac ce ss t o al l l egal m at er i al s ( l aw l i brary) . ” I d. H e a ss ert ed thathe dem on stra t ed a c tua l ha rm by s how i ng tha thi s c a s e on appe a l t o ourc i r c ui tha d be e n di s m i s s e d, a n d th a t h e h a d b e e n u n ab le to s u p p le m e n t a n in itia l b r ie f o rf ile ar e p ly b r ie f

in h is F l o ri d a d i rectap p eal . H e fu rth er arg u ed th ath i s case w as n o tfri v o l o u s b ecau se “[ t]h e d e f

e n d a n ts a r e n o t im m u n e f r o m s u it, ale g a l in te r e s t– a c c e s s to C o u rts [

– ]c e rta in ly e x is ts , [ a n d ] th e f a c ts a lle g e d a r e c le a r ly n o t b a s e le s s , f a n c if u l, o rirr a tio n a l in th e le a s t.” I d . a t 3 . O n th is b a s is , H y la n d a s k e d th e c o u rt to r e c o n s id e rits d is m is s a l o f h is c o m p la in t. O n 1 9 M ay20 05 , i n an o rderw i th n o m em orandu m , the di stri ctcourtdeni ed H y l a nd’ s m ot i on f

orr e c ons i de r a t i on. O n 9 J une 2005, H y l a nd f i l e d hi s not i c e of11

appe a l a s t o the or de rof di s m i s s a l a nd the or de rde ny i ng r e c ons i de r a t i on of the M ay10 di sm i ss al . W e s ub se qu ent l y e nt er ed an order fi nd i ng thatthe appeal w as n o t f r iv o lo u s a n d a llo w e d H y la n d to p r o c e e d . I I . DI S CUS S I ON W e r e vi e w adi s tr i c tc ourt ’ s s uas pont e di s m i s s a l of ac l a i m a s f

r i vol ous unde r28 U . S . C . § 1915( e ) ( 2) ( B ) ( i ) f orabus e of

di s c r e t i on. B i l a l v. D r i ve r , 251 F . 3d 13 46 , 13 49 (11th C i r. 20 01 ). “ [B ] ec ause di stri ctj ud ges r em ai n m ore f am i l i ar w i th and ar e m ore e xp er i ence d t o rec og ni ze po t ent i al l y f ri vo l ou s c l ai m s . . . [a ] d e te rm in a tio n o f

f r iv o lity is b e s t le f

t to th e d is tr ic t c o u rt.” I d . W e h a v e n o t a n n o u n c e d as ta n d a r d o f r e v ie w f o rad is tr ic t c o u rt’s s u as p o n te di sm i ss al of a c l ai m as fr i vo l ou s und er28 U . S . C . § 1 91 5A (b)( 1), the other prov i si on ci t ed i n the i nst antorder. O ther c i rc ui t s are spl i ton the i ss ue. C om pare S haku r v. S el sky, 39 1 F . 3d 10 6, 11 2 (2d C i r. 20 04 ) ( appl yi ng de no vo re vi ew ), w i th M a rt i n v. S c ott , 156 F . 3d 578, 580 ( 5th C i r . 1998) ( pe rc ur i a m ) ( appl y i ng abuse of di sc re t i on ). T he re as on s und er l yi ng ou r s t andard of revi ew for § 19 15 (e )( 2)(B )( i ) per suade us thatabuse of di sc re t i on i s the corre ctst andard for § 1 9 1 5 A ( b ) ( 1 ) a s w e ll. S e e B ila l, 2 5 1 F .3 d a t 1 3 4 9 . N e v e rth e le s s , an y u n c e rta in ty i s i m m a t e r i a l a s H y l a nd s uc c e e ds unde re i the rthe abus e of di s c r e t i on s t a nda r d or d e n o v o r e v i e w.12

U nde r28 U . S . C . § 1915( e ) ( 2) , the di s tr i c tc ourtm us tdi s m i s s the c om pl a i nt of apl a i nt i f

f pr oc e e di ng I F P i f

“ the c ourtde t e rm i ne s tha t. . . ( B ) the a c t i on or appeal–(i ) i s f

ri vo l ou s or m al i ci ou s. ” S i m i l ar l y, un der 28 U . S . C . § 1 91 5A (b)( 1), the courtm ustdi sm i ss a pri soner’ s c om pl ai nti f i ti s “ fr i vo l ou s [ or] m al i ci ou s. ” I n de f i ni ng f r i vol i ty , w e ha ve s a i d tha t“ [ a ] c l a i m i s f r i vol ous i f

i ti s w i thout arg u ab l e m eri tei th er i n l aw o r fact . ” B i l al , 2 5 1 F . 3 d at1 3 4 9 . W e h av e al so s t a t e d tha tac a s e i s f

r i vol ous w he n i tappe a r s tha tthe pl a i nt i f f ha s l i tt l e orno ch an ce o f su ccess, i . e. , w h en th e co m p l ai n to n i t s face m ak es cl earl y b asel ess a l l e ga t i ons orr e l i e s on l e ga l the or i e s tha ta r e i ndi s put abl y m e r i t l e s s . S e e C a rr ol l v. G r os s , 984 F . 2d 392, 393 ( 11th C i r . 1993) ( pe rc ur i a m ) ( c i t i ng N e i t z ke v. W i l l i am s, 49 0 U . S . 31 9, 32 7 1 09 S . C t . 18 27 , 18 32 (198 9); D ent on v. H ernand ez , 5 0 4 U .S . 2 5 , 3 1 - 3 4 , 1 1 2 S . C t. 1 7 2 8 , 1 7 3 3 - 3 4 ( 1 9 9 2 ) ) . I n th is c a s e , a de t e rm i na t i on of

f r i vol i ty turns on the l a w r e ga r di ng H y l a nd’ s c ons t i tut i ona l r i ght t o access t o th e co u rt s. P r is o n e r s h a v e ar ig h t to a c c e s s to th e c o u rts u n d e rth e F o u rte e n th A m e ndm e nt . W i l s on v. B l a nke ns hi p, 163 F . 3d 1284, 1290 ( 11th C i r . 1998) ( c i t i ng B ounds v. S m i th, 430 U . S . 817, 828, 97 S . C t . 1491, 1498 ( 1977) ) . T o the e xt e nt th a t p r is o n e r s h a v e ar ig h t o f a c c e s s to ala w lib r a ry , th is r ig h t is d e p e n d e n t o n th e ir r i ghtt o a c c e s s t o the c ourt s . I d. ( c i t i ng L e w i s v. C a s e y , 518 U . S . 343, 349- 351,13

116 S . C t . 2174, 2179- 80 ( 1996) ) . I n thi s a tt e nua t e d s e tt i ng, pr i s one r s m us tdo m or e tha n s how i nt e r f

e r e nc e w i th the i rr i ghtt o al a w l i br a ry ; the y m us ta l s o s how actu al h arm . L ew i s, 5 1 8 U . S . at3 5 1 , 1 1 6 S . C t . at2 1 8 0 (“ [T ] h e i n m at e[s] the r e f or e m us tgo one s t e p f

urthe ra nd de m ons tr a t e tha tthe a l l e ge d s hort c om i ngs i n the l i brary or l egal as si st ance prog ra m hi nd er ed [thei r] ef fort s t o p ursue al egal c la im .” ) . F u rth e r , o n ly s p e c if ic typ e s o f

le g a l c la im s a r e p r o te c te db y th is r ig h t, n a m e ly , th e n o n f

r iv o lo u s p r o s e c u tio n o f

e ith e rad ir e c t ap p e a l o f ac o n v ic tio n , a habe a s pe t i t i on, orac i vi l r i ght s s ui t . B a s s v. S i ngl e t a ry , 143 F . 3d 1442, 1445 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) . A pr i s one r ’ s s t a ndi ng i n the s e c a s e s r e qui r e s s how i ng a n a c tua l i nj ury t o the p r o s e c u t i o n o f

o n e o f th e s e a c t i o n s . I d . ( c i t i n g Le w i s , 5 1 8 U . S. a t3 4 9 - 3 5 0 , 1 1 6 S. C t . a t2179) . T he S upr e m e C ourtha s e xpl a i ne d tha t“ e a c h e l e m e nt[ of s t a ndi ng] m us tbe s upport e d . . . w i th the m a nne ra nd de gr e e of e vi de nc e r e qui r e d a tthe succ es si ve st ages of the l i t i gat i on . A tthe pl ea di ng st age, generalfa ctual a l l e ga t i ons of

i nj ury r e s ul t i ng f

r om the de f

e nda nt ’ s c onduc tm a y s uf f i c e , f oron a m o tio n to d is m is s w e p r e s u m e th a t g e n e r a l a lle g a tio n s e m b r a c e th o s e s p e c if ic f a c ts tha ta r e ne c e s s a ry t o s upportthe c l a i m . ” L e w i s , 518 U . S . a t358, 116 S . C t . a t2183 ( quot i ng L uj a n v. D e f

e nde r s of W i l dl i f e , 504 U . S . 555, 561, 112 S . C t . 2130, 2 1 3 6 - 3 7 ( 1 9 9 2 ) ) .14

W e ha ve , i n c ontr a s t i ng ac a s e a na l y z e d s uas pont e f orf r i vol i ty w i th one a na l y z e d on s um m a ry j udgm e nt , e xpl a i ne d tha tthe pl a i nt i f f w oul d s urvi ve the f r i vol i ty a na l y s i s i f

hi s “ a l l e ga t i on[ s ] s uf

f i c i e nt l y a s s e rt e d” a c tua l ha rm t o a qua l i f i e d l e ga l a c t i on. B a s s , 143 F . 3d a t1445. W e e xpl a i ne d tha t , i n s uc h a s i tua t i on, the di s tr i c tc ourtc oul d notdi s m i s s a n “ a c c e s s - t o- c ourt s c l a i m ba s e d upon af a ilu r e to a lle g e a c tu a l in ju ry .” I d . ( c itin g L e w is , 5 1 8 U .S . a t 3 5 2 - 5 7 , 1 1 6 S . C t. at21 81 -82). N everthel es s, w e r ej ec t ed cl ai m s of avi ol at ed ri gh tt o acc es s bec ause , on s um m a ry j udgm e nt , the pl a i nt i f f s ha d pr e s e nt e d no e vi de nc e of a ny ha rm , a nd h a d o n ly m a d e in c o m p le te a lle g a tio n s . S e e id . a t 1 4 4 6 . I n hi s a m e nde d c om pl a i nt , H y l a nd a l l e ge d tha taf e de r a l c i vi l r i ght s a c t i on tha the w a s pr os e c ut i ng ha d be e n di s m i s s e d on appe a l a nd tha the ha d m i s s e d a d e a d lin e in h is F lo r id ad ir e c t c r im in a l ap p e a l d u e to th e d e f e n d a n ts ’ r e f

u s a l to al l ow hi m ac ce ss t o n ec es saryl egal m at er i al s. T aki ng these al l egat i on s a s true, H y l a nd ha s de m ons tr a t e d a c tua l ha rm t o aqua l i f i e d l e ga l a c t i on, a nd he s houl d be a l l ow e d the opportuni ty t o pr e s e nte vi de nc e . M or e ove r , H y l a nd’ s c l a i m s do not la c ka r g u ab le m e r it, a r e n o t c le a r ly b a s e le s s , d o n o t r e ly o n a n in d is p u tab ly m e r i t l e s s l e ga l the ory , orothe rw i s e s ugge s ttha the ha s l i tt l e orno c ha nc e of succ es s. T hu s, these al l egat i on s are suff i ci entt o survi ve fr i vo l i ty anal ys i s und er se ct i on s 191 5(e) (2)( B )( i ) and 19 15 A (b)( 1).15 I I I . CONCL US I ON U pon c a r e f

ul r e vi e w of

the pl e a di ngs a nd di s tr i c tc ourtor de r s a nd upon co n sid er atio n o f H ylan d ’s b rief , w e f in d th at th e d ec isio n to d ism iss H ylan d ’s a m e nde d c om pl a i nta s f r i vol ous w a s e rr one ous a nd a n abus e of di s c r e t i on. F orthe above r e a s ons , w e va c a t e the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s or de ra nd r e m a nd the m a tt e rf or f urthe rpr oc e e di ngs . H y l a nd’ s obj e c t i on t o the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de ni a l of hi s m ot i on f o rr e c o n s id e r a tio n is th e r e f o r e m o o t. VA C A TED A N D R EM A N D ED .