Hill v. Tyler
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:20-cv-04797
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Hill v. Tyler, Judge Rogers dismissed the civil-rights case without prejudice because Hill neither paid the fee nor submitted the required fee-waiver application.
The dismissal affected Cymeyon V. Hill’s action against M. Tyler and the other named defendants; the court did not reach the merits of the claims.
What happened
In Hill v. Tyler, Cymeyon V. Hill, a civil detainee representing himself, filed a civil-rights complaint under a federal law that allows suits against state officials. The court had previously determined that Hill was not a prisoner covered by the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
The court ordered Hill to either pay the filing fee or submit a completed application to proceed without paying it. The court warned that the case would be dismissed if he did not do so within 28 days. Hill did neither and did not otherwise contact the court.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers dismissed the action without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar a new filing. The clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions and close the case.
The detailed version
- Hill v. Tyler · No. 4:20-cv-04797
- Yvonne Rogers
- Sept. 29, 2020
Background
Cymeyon V. Hill filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The opinion identifies Hill as a civil detainee who was representing himself. In an earlier order, the court explained that because Hill was a civil detainee, he was not a “prisoner” subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
Filing-fee requirement
The court directed Hill to submit a non-prisoner application to proceed in forma pauperis (without paying the filing fee) or to pay the filing fee. The court sent him a blank application and warned that he had 28 days to pay the fee or return a completed application. More than 28 days passed, and Hill did neither or otherwise communicate with the court.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action without prejudice. It also directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the file. The order did not decide the merits of Hill’s civil-rights claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.