Source: https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/florida/flmdce/2:2016cv00329/323100/115
Timestamp: 2018-03-21 05:40:51
Document Index: 599579393

Matched Legal Cases: ['Case No: 2', '§ 1914', '§ 1914', '§ 1914', '§1914', '§ 1915']

OPINION AND ORDER denying re: 110 MOTION for clarification re 95 Order on motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis/affidavit of indigency MOTION for miscellaneous relief, specifically to dispense with filing fee requirement for Bilal v. GEO Group, Inc. (GEO) :: Justia Dockets & Filings
Justia Dockets & Filings Eleventh Circuit Florida Florida Middle District Court Bilal v. GEO Group, Inc. (GEO) Filing 115
Bilal v. GEO Group, Inc. (GEO)
OPINION AND ORDER denying re: 110 MOTION for clarification re 95 Order on motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis/affidavit of indigency MOTION for miscellaneous relief, specifically to dispense with filing fee requirement. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 3/13/2018. (SLU)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION JAMAAL ALI BILAL, Petitioner, v. Case No: 2:16-cv-329-FtM-38MRM GEO GROUP, INC. (GEO) and KRISTIN KANNER, Respondents. / OPINION AND ORDER1 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Jamaal Ali Bilal's Motion for Clarification Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) Requires Defendant's to Pay Filing Fees Based Upon Their Choice to Remove this Case to the Federal Forum or in the Alternative Motion to Dispense with Filing Fee Requirement Given the Fact Plaintiff was Allowed to Proceed IFP in State Court Prior to Defendant's Choice to Remove this Case to the Federal Forum (Doc. 110) filed on January 10, 2018. The Plaintiff argues that 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) requires the Party removing the case to Federal Court to pay the Court’s filing fee. Therefore, Plaintiff argues that Defendants should pay for his fees on appeal since they removed the case to federal court. 1 Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court. On November 12, 2015, the Defendants did pay the $400.00 filing fee to remove the case to this Court. While Plaintiff argues that Defendants should also pay his fee to file an appeal with the Eleventh Circuit, 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) specifically states that it applies to the filing fees in the district courts and does not address the Circuit Courts of Appeal. Thus, contrary to Plaintiff’s claim, Defendants complied with 28 U.S.C. §1914(a). Plaintiff also moves the Court to dispense with the filing fee requirement on appeal. On February 9, 2018, the Court found that Plaintiff’s appeal was frivolous and not taken in good faith pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4). As such, Plaintiff’s motion to appeal IFP is denied. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: Plaintiff Jamaal Ali Bilal's Motion for Clarification Whether 28 U.S.C. s 1914(a) Requires Defendant's to Pay Filing Fees Based Upon Their Choice to Remove this Case to the Federal Forum or in the Alternative Motion to Dispense with Filing Fee Requirement Given Fact Plaintiff was Allowed to Proceed IFP in State Court Prior to Defendant's Choice to Remove this Case to the Federal Forum (Doc. 110) is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 13th day of March, 2018. Copies: All Parties of Record SA: FTMP-2 2