Bonilla v. Novack
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:19-cv-06305
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Bonilla v. Novack, Judge Chhabria dismissed the civil-rights lawsuit with prejudice because Bonilla could not proceed without paying the filing fee and Heck barred it.
Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state inmate who filed the civil action without a lawyer, cannot continue this case because it was dismissed with prejudice.
What happened
In Bonilla v. Novack, Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state inmate representing himself, sued Charles Novack under a civil-rights law. Novack is identified as the chief judge of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California.
The court said Bonilla was barred from proceeding without paying the filing fee because his allegations did not show that he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint. The court also said that, even if Bonilla’s application to proceed without paying the fee were granted, the lawsuit would be barred under Heck v. Humphrey.
Judge Vince Chhabria dismissed the case with prejudice, ordered the Clerk to close the case, and directed the Clerk to return without filing any further documents Bonilla submits after the case is closed.
The detailed version
- Bonilla v. Novack · No. 3:19-cv-06305
- Vince Chhabria
- Oct. 31, 2019
Background
Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state inmate proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Charles Novack. The opinion identifies Novack as the chief judge of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California.
Reason for dismissal
The court said Bonilla had previously been disqualified from proceeding in forma pauperis, meaning without paying the filing fee, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That statute permits such a litigant to proceed without paying only if he was facing imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint. The court found that Bonilla’s allegations did not show imminent danger at that time.
The court further stated that, even if it granted an application to proceed without paying the filing fee, the lawsuit would be barred under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486–87 (1994). The opinion does not describe the underlying allegations in further detail.
Disposition
The court dismissed the case with prejudice. It also stated that the assigned judge’s impartiality could not reasonably be questioned. The Clerk was ordered to close the case and return without filing any further documents Bonilla submits after the case is closed. Judge Vince Chhabria signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.