Source: https://ja.scribd.com/document/2698352/SMITH-v-HUMPHRIES-et-al-Document-No-4
Timestamp: 2019-07-17 00:17:34
Document Index: 750011771

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§\n10001']

SMITH v. HUMPHRIES et al - Document No. 4 | Complaint | Lawsuit
SMITH v. HUMPHRIES et al - Document No. 4
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, It is RECOMMENDED that re 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by WILLIE A SMITH BE DENIED and 1 Complaint filed by WILLIE A SMITH be DISMISSED without prejudice. Internal deadline for referral to district judge if objections are not filed earlier: 5/10/2006. Signed by Judge WILLIAM C SHERRILL JR on 4/12/06. (pll, Tallahassee) 4:2006cv00163 Florida Northern District Court
saveSave SMITH v. HUMPHRIES et al - Document No. 4 For Later
Moore v. Speech et al - Document No. 4
United India Insurance vs SK Narayana Hernia Repudiation Improper Judgment
Jones v. Parker - Document No. 4
Acknowledgment of Customer Complaint
Riches v. Simpson et al - Document No. 3
Sykes v. Wilkes - Document No. 4
Draper v. Wagner - Document No. 3
Spencer v. Rice - Document No. 4
Reynolds v. Ward et al (INMATE 1) (MEMBER CASE) - Document No. 3
Lacey v. Birkett et al - Document No. 3
Bodie v. State of North Carolina et al - Document No. 4
FORMAL COMPLAIN Jim Morrison cmtee 1.doc
(Digest) Cosco v Kemper
Garnet L. Fuller, of the Estate of James A. Fuller and Garnet L. Fuller, Helen Joyce Doane, Now Known as Helen Joyce Dulin and Lee Doane, Defendants-Third Party v. Branch County Road Commission, Third Party, 520 F.2d 307, 3rd Cir. (1975)
Joseph Hiram Holt, Jr., a Minor, by His Next Friend, Joseph Hiram Holt and Joseph Hiram Holt and Elwyna Holt v. Raleigh City Board of Education, a Body Corporate, 265 F.2d 95, 4th Cir. (1959)
JIFEL-1
SMITH v. HUMPHRIES et al Doc.
Case 4:06-cv-00163-RH-WCS Document 4 Filed 04/12/2006 Page 1 of 3
WILLIE SMITH, DOC # 040330,
vs. Case No. 4:06cv163-RH/WCS
WARDEN MARTHA HUMPHRIES,
Plaintiff, an inmate proceeding pro se, has submitted a civil rights complaint, doc.
1, and an in forma pauperis motion, doc. 2. Plaintiff just recently had a case dismissed
sua sponte because Plaintiff is not entitled to in forma pauperis status. See case
4:06cv98-SPM/WCS. Thus, Plaintiff is fully aware that he may not proceed without full
prepayment of the Court's filing fee.
Plaintiff has previously initiated numerous civil cases, several of which were
dismissed for failure to comply with court orders. See cases 5:02cv20, 5:02cv21,
5:02cv23, 5:02cv40, 5:02cv41, 5:02cv42, 5:02cv45. Several other cases were
dismissed for failure to prosecute. See cases 8:98cv304, 5:93cv167, and 5:93cv251.
Case 4:06-cv-00163-RH-WCS Document 4 Filed 04/12/2006 Page 2 of 3
Plaintiff has had three cases dismissed for reasons which count as "strikes" under the
Prison Litigation Reform Act (the "PLRA"), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). In case 5:02cv43,
Plaintiff was denied in forma pauperis status and his case was dismissed for being
frivolous, and for submitting a false complaint form which did not properly list all prior
cases.1 In case 5:02cv22, the complaint was similarly dismissed for Plaintiff's abuse of
the judicial process because he did not properly account for all his prior cases. In a
third case, number 5:02cv44, the complaint was likewise dismissed as frivolous under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Those three dismissals preclude Plaintiff from being
granted in forma pauperis status in this case. Accordingly, because Plaintiff is not
entitled to in forma pauperis status pursuant to § 1915(g),2 his motion for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, doc. 2, must be denied.
Plaintiff's claims in this case have been reviewed and they do not fall within the
"imminent danger of serious physical injury" exception to the in forma pauperis bar of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g). Thus, Plaintiff's case must be dismissed. The dismissal should be
without prejudice to him making the same allegations in a complaint for which he pays
A dismissal for failing to disclose all prior cases stands is abuse of the judicial
process and counts as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Rivera v. Allin, 144
F.3d 719, 731 (11th Cir.), cert. denied 524 U.S. 978 (1998).
That statute provides that a prisoner may not bring a civil action in forma
pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915:
if the prisoner 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.
Case No. 4:06cv163-RH/WCS
Case 4:06-cv-00163-RH-WCS Document 4 Filed 04/12/2006 Page 3 of 3
the full $350.003 filing fee at the time of filing the complaint. See Dupree v. Palmer, 284
F.3d 1234 (11th Cir. 2002).
In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's motion
to proceed in forma pauperis, doc. 2, be DENIED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and
that Plaintiff’s complaint, doc. 1, be DISMISSED without prejudice.
IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on April 12, 2006.
s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr.
A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and
recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and
recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 10 days after
being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of
review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.
On April 9, 2006, the filing fee was increased from $250.00 to $350.00 by §
10001 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, P.L. 109-171.
Documents Similar To SMITH v. HUMPHRIES et al - Document No. 4
Raviprakash Kaje
Ron DiMambro
Melendres # 701 - May 7 2014B Hearing Transcript D.ariz._2-07-Cv-02513_701
COMPLAINT_Criminal_Affidavit.docx
Answer to the Complaint Legal Forms
Ramon Christopher Ravina Nollora
CSC Response To Richardson
Complaint for Forcible Entry
Russell Steedley v. James McBride, 3rd Cir. (2011)
Has Biscuit Manufacturer Britannia Industries Found A
ch 32 end of the cold war
Css Syllabus Course
Gulirukh
ramin_babae
Todd Bentley ` John Crowder. a New Angel Called Drug Hustler and Spiritual Tokes
Book Audience Romance
nicoagudelo82
api-25974202
Roman-Martinez v. Runyon, 1st Cir. (1996)