Anthony R. Turner v. Brown
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:19-cv-01406
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Anthony R. Turner v. Brown, Judge Rogers ordered Turner to explain why his filing-fee waiver and case should not be denied or dismissed.
Anthony R. Turner and the status of his request to proceed without paying the filing fee in this action; the order also addresses review of his future fee-waiver requests while incarcerated.
What happened
Anthony R. Turner, a California state prisoner representing himself, filed a civil-rights lawsuit seeking damages and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront. The court issued an order requiring him to explain why that request and the case should not be denied or dismissed.
The court said Turner had at least three earlier prisoner cases dismissed for reasons that may count under a federal law limiting fee waivers for prisoners. The court also said Turner did not appear to face an immediate risk of serious physical injury. Turner could respond within 28 days or avoid dismissal by paying the full $400 filing fee.
The court did not yet dismiss the case or rule on the claims. It ordered Turner to show cause, and warned that failing to respond on time or pay the full fee would result in dismissal without further notice. Judge Yvonne Rogers issued the order.
The detailed version
- Anthony R. Turner v. Brown · No. 4:19-cv-01406
- Yvonne Rogers
- Sept. 24, 2019
Background
Anthony R. Turner, a California state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages for alleged civil-rights violations. He also asked for permission to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.
The potential filing-fee bar
The Prison Litigation Reform Act generally prevents a prisoner from proceeding without paying the filing fee if, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated or detained, the prisoner brought a federal action or appeal that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. This restriction does not apply if the prisoner is under an imminent danger of serious physical injury.
The court explained that the prisoner must receive notice of the possible filing-fee restriction and an opportunity to respond. The prisoner bears the ultimate burden of showing that the restriction does not apply. If the restriction applies, the prisoner may still pursue the claims by paying the full filing fee at the beginning of the case.
The court reviewed dismissal orders from at least three of Turner's prior prisoner cases. The listed dismissals included dismissals for failure to state a claim, failure to prosecute, and failure to correct pleading errors. The court stated that these dismissals may be counted for purposes of the filing-fee restriction. It also stated that Turner did not appear to be under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
Order
The court ordered Turner to show cause in writing within 28 days why his request to proceed without paying the filing fee should not be denied and why the action should not be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Turner could avoid dismissal by paying the $400 filing fee. The court warned that failing to respond on time or failing to pay the full fee would result in dismissal without further notice. The order did not itself deny the fee request or dismiss the action. Judge Yvonne Rogers also stated that the court would continue applying the filing-fee restriction to Turner's future actions filed while he is incarcerated and seeking that status.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.