Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 2, 2020

Stuckey v. Howard

Docket
4:19-cv-03691
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
4
Civil RightsPro SePreliminary InjunctionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Stuckey v. Howard, the court granted fee status but denied counsel and a preliminary injunction without prejudice.

Who this affects

Andre Kenneth Stuckey, the defendants, and the prison trust account and court financial offices responsible for processing the filing-fee payments.

What happened

In Andre Kenneth Stuckey v. D.HOWARD, et al., Andre Kenneth Stuckey, a California state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights lawsuit and asked to pay the filing fee over time, receive appointed counsel, and obtain a preliminary injunction.

The court granted Stuckey permission to proceed without paying the full filing fee upfront and set the initial partial fee at $1.09. It denied his request for appointed counsel because the case was at an early stage and he had adequately presented his claims. It also denied the preliminary-injunction request without prejudice because the defendants had not been served, the notice requirements were not met, and the court had not yet screened the amended complaint.

The court said Stuckey could submit the injunction request again if the case proceeded and the defendants were served. The order was entered on January 2, 2020, by the court.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Stuckey v. Howard · No. 4:19-cv-03691
Date
Jan. 2, 2020

Background

Andre Kenneth Stuckey filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while proceeding without a lawyer. His amended complaint was the operative complaint. He filed three related requests: an application to proceed without paying the full filing fee upfront, a motion for appointment of counsel, and a motion for a preliminary injunction.

Filing-fee status

The court granted Stuckey's application to proceed without paying the full filing fee upfront. The total filing fee was $350.00, and the initial partial filing fee was $1.09. The order directed the prison trust account office to collect the initial amount and later payments from the account as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Appointment of counsel

The court denied the request for appointed counsel. Under the standard discussed in the order, appointment for an indigent civil litigant requires exceptional circumstances, considering both the likelihood of success and the litigant's ability to present the claims. The court said the case was at an early stage, making Stuckey's likelihood of success premature to assess, and that he had adequately presented his claims without a lawyer given the issues' complexity.

Preliminary injunction

A preliminary injunction is a court order issued before final judgment that requires or prevents specified conduct. The court denied Stuckey's motion for a preliminary injunction without prejudice. It found that the request did not satisfy the notice requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 because the defendants had not yet been served. The court also stated that Stuckey had not met the requirements for obtaining emergency relief without notice.

The court further concluded that the request was premature because it first had to screen the amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A to determine whether it stated claims that could proceed. The court said Stuckey could resubmit the preliminary-injunction motion if the case proceeded to briefing and the defendants were served. The court stated that it would address screening in a separate written order.

Disposition

The court granted the application to proceed without paying the full filing fee upfront, denied the motion for appointment of counsel, and denied the motion for a preliminary injunction without prejudice. The order terminated Docket Nos. 2, 3, and 5.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.