Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 8, 2021

Purdy v. Wilkins

Judge
Susan Nelson
Docket
0:21-cv-00315
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Purdy v. Wilkins, Judge Nelson granted Purdy permission to appeal without prepaying, but required a $20.23 initial fee and later installments.

Who this affects

Jeffrey Colin Purdy, who was permitted to proceed on appeal without prepaying the full filing fee but must pay $20.23 immediately and the remaining $505.00 in installments; prison officials may deduct the remaining amount from his trust account.

What happened

In Purdy v. Wilkins, Jeffrey Colin Purdy asked to appeal without paying the full court fee in advance. The opinion identifies Purdy as a prisoner representing himself.

Judge Nelson found that Purdy could proceed without prepaying the full fee because he had previously been found unable to afford an adequate defense in a federal criminal case, and the court did not find that his appeal was brought in bad faith. The court calculated his initial payment from the available account information.

Judge Susan Richard Nelson granted Purdy’s application to appeal without prepaying the full fee. She ordered him to pay $20.23 immediately, with the remaining $505.00 appellate filing fee collected in installments over time.

The detailed version

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

Case
Purdy v. Wilkins · No. 0:21-cv-00315
Judge
Susan Nelson
Date
Oct. 8, 2021

Background

Jeffrey Colin Purdy, who is incarcerated and representing himself, filed an application for permission to proceed on appeal without prepaying the filing fee. The application concerned an appeal from matters previously decided in this case. The court stated that it continued to believe it had correctly decided those matters, but it did not find that Purdy’s appeal was brought in bad faith.

Legal standard

Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3), a person who was previously found unable to afford an adequate defense in a federal criminal case may generally proceed on appeal without prepaying the filing fee unless the district court finds that the appeal is not brought in good faith or that another legal restriction applies. The court noted that Purdy had received appointed counsel in his federal criminal case after being found financially unable to obtain an adequate defense. The court was not aware of a statute preventing him from proceeding without prepaying the fee.

Because Purdy is a prisoner, the Prison Litigation Reform Act required him to pay the appellate filing fee in installments rather than excusing the fee altogether. The statute requires an initial partial fee equal to 20 percent of the greater of the prisoner’s average monthly deposits or average monthly account balance. It also requires later monthly payments from the prisoner’s account until the fee is paid, subject to the statutory limit.

Fee calculation

The available account information showed average monthly deposits of $101.17 and an average monthly balance of $56.48. Because the deposits were greater, the court calculated the initial partial fee as 20 percent of $101.17, or $20.23. The court explained that this amount would be due if Purdy pursued the appeal regardless of its outcome. Prison officials were authorized to deduct the remaining amount of the $505.00 filing fee from Purdy’s trust account as required by the statute. The court also noted that the calculation used the available information because Purdy lacked certificates from several other institutions where he had recently been held.

Disposition

The court granted Purdy’s application to proceed on appeal without prepaying the full filing fee. It ordered Purdy to pay the initial partial filing fee of $20.23 immediately and ordered that the remainder of the $505.00 appellate filing fee be paid in installments over time. This order addressed payment of the appellate filing fee and did not decide the underlying issues in the appeal.

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.