Sivak v. Perea

Background

Lacey Sivak, an Idaho state prisoner representing himself, filed the multiple cases listed in the order against Zahida Perea. The cases presented nearly identical claims, including petitions asking the court to compel certain conduct by Perea, whom the order identifies as the paralegal at the prison’s law library. Sivak requested permission to proceed without paying filing fees in each action.

Fee-waiver ruling

The court held that Sivak was disqualified from proceeding without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which limits fee-free filings by a prisoner who has had at least three qualifying cases dismissed. The exception applies if the prisoner shows that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed. The court said Sivak had at least three qualifying dismissals and that the allegations in these cases did not show imminent danger at the time of filing. The court therefore denied his motions for permission to proceed without paying filing fees.

Other rulings

The court also stated that, even if a fee-waiver request had been granted, the lawsuits would be barred under a prior appellate decision holding that federal courts lack authority to issue this type of order directing state courts, state judicial officers, or other state officials in performing their duties.

The court denied any motions to disqualify the undersigned judge. It found that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not create a reasonable question about the judge’s impartiality. The order also noted that Sivak sought disqualification because he identified the judge as a defendant in another case, but it concluded that disqualification was not warranted.

Disposition

The court dismissed the above-captioned actions with prejudice. It directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the actions, and to return without filing any further documents Sivak submitted in the closed cases.