Richard v. Webster
- Edward Chen
- 3:21-cv-02325
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Richard v. Webster, Judge Chen denied Richard’s payment requests but extended his deadline to pay the filing fee.
Darelle Tyreece Richard, who received more time to pay the filing fee but was denied his requests for the court to deduct the fee or order North Kern State Prison officials to process payment.
What happened
Darelle Tyreece Richard, a prisoner representing himself, filed a civil-rights lawsuit under a federal law against Webster and other defendants. He had asked to proceed without paying the filing fee, but the court denied that request because it found he was not sufficiently unable to pay.
Richard then asked the court to deduct the fee from his prison account, order North Kern State Prison officials to process the payment, or explain how he could make the payment. The court said it could not deduct money from his account and could not order officials who were not parties to the case to act.
The court denied the payment motion, told Richard to submit a completed Form 193 Trust Account Withdrawal Order and seek instructions from prison officials, and extended the payment deadline to November 4, 2022. Judge Edward M. Chen emphasized that the order did not decide whether Richard’s lawsuit had merit and that the complaint still had to pass screening.
The detailed version
- Richard v. Webster · No. 3:21-cv-02325
- Edward Chen
- Sept. 21, 2022
Background
Darelle Tyreece Richard, an inmate at North Kern State Prison, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 concerning an incident at San Bruno Jail. Richard was representing himself. He asked to proceed without paying the filing fee, but the court denied that request because it found that he was insufficiently indigent.
Richard then filed a motion asking the court to deduct the filing fee from his prison trust account, order North Kern State Prison to process the payment, or provide instructions on how to request that the prison process the payment.
Court’s analysis
The court denied the request to deduct the fee because it lacked the ability to take money directly from Richard’s trust account. It also denied the request to order North Kern State Prison officials to process the payment without further action by Richard because the court did not have jurisdiction over those officials, who had not been named in the case.
The court stated that Richard must submit a completed Form 193 Trust Account Withdrawal Order to the prison trust office. The court referred to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s procedure for requesting payment of state-court filing fees and saw no reason federal-court filing fees would use a different procedure. The court cautioned that it did not have expertise in North Kern State Prison’s procedures and suggested that Richard show the order to his correctional counselor or the prison’s litigation coordinator and follow the instructions he received. The court also requested that prison officials inform Richard how he could pay the filing fee.
Ruling and effect
The court granted Richard an extension of time to pay the filing fee, requiring full payment by November 4, 2022. It denied both parts of his payment motion: the request for the court to deduct the fee and the request for an order directed to North Kern State Prison officials. The order disposed of Docket No. 11.
Judge Edward M. Chen expressly stated that the order did not reach the merits of Richard’s lawsuit. Even if Richard paid the fee, his complaint still had to undergo required prisoner screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A before the defendants could be served. That screening could result in dismissal if the complaint were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim, or sought money from an immune defendant.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.