Turner v. Los Angeles General Medical Center

Background

Self-represented plaintiff Terrance Turner filed 31 cases in the Northern District of California between July and December 2023. Three cases filed within a six-week period, including this case, were before Judge Donna M. Ryu. Turner filed applications to proceed without paying filing fees in all three cases and declared under penalty of perjury that the information in the applications was true and correct.

Court’s analysis

The court described the three applications as confusing and inconsistent. In one application, Turner said that he had worked for Wipro and earned $5,000 per month before being fired in May. Four days later, in the application in this case, he did not mention Wipro and instead described plans to spend money buying leads for legal clients. In a third application, he again identified Wipro as his last employer but reported different pay and a different date for his last payment.

The court also reviewed information from other applications Turner filed in the district. Those applications contained conflicting statements about whether he had income, how much he earned, whether clients paid him for legal matters, whether he was employed after May, and whether he had started or expected to start other jobs. The court stated that the information was too inconsistent to determine whether Turner qualified for the fee waiver. It also noted that another judge had described a similar pattern in an earlier related proceeding.

Order

The court ordered Turner to show cause—in other words, to explain in writing—why his fee-waiver applications should not be denied. He had to respond by January 30, 2024, in each of the three cases. The court warned that failing to respond by that date might result in denial of the applications. This order itself did not deny the applications or decide the underlying claims against the defendants.