Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 23, 2022

Jackson v. Find Jodi. Com, Inc

Judge
Susan Nelson
Docket
0:21-cv-01777
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

Jackson v. FindJodi.com, Judge Nelson denied Jackson’s request to proceed without paying appeal fees because he had three prior qualifying dismissals and showed no individualized imminent danger.

Who this affects

Tony Dejuan Jackson’s ability to proceed without prepaying filing fees for his appeal; the order also directs the clerk to notify the Eighth Circuit.

What happened

In Tony Dejuan Jackson v. FindJodi.com, Inc. et al., Tony Dejuan Jackson asked to appeal without paying the required filing fees. He represented himself and was incarcerated.

The court found that Jackson had three prior federal cases or appeals dismissed for reasons covered by the prisoner filing-fee law. That law generally prevents a prisoner with three such dismissals from proceeding without paying fees unless he faces an immediate risk of serious physical injury. Jackson pointed to COVID-19’s presence at the correctional facility but did not provide information showing that he personally faced a heightened risk.

Judge Susan Richard Nelson denied Jackson’s request to proceed without paying the appeal fees. She also directed the clerk to notify the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit of the denial.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jackson v. Find Jodi. Com, Inc · No. 0:21-cv-01777
Judge
Susan Nelson
Date
Mar. 23, 2022

Background

Tony Dejuan Jackson filed a notice of appeal that also asked to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning without prepaying the appeal’s filing fees. The opinion states that Jackson represented himself and was incarcerated at the Minnesota Correctional Facility–Stillwater.

The court noted that its docket contained two copies of the relevant document—one docketed as a notice of appeal and one as an application to proceed without paying fees. Because it was unclear whether Jackson filed the document twice or the clerk recorded it twice because it served both purposes, the court treated the document at docket number 22 as Jackson’s request to proceed without paying fees on appeal.

Legal standard

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner generally may not appeal a civil judgment without paying the filing fees if, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated or detained, the prisoner brought a federal action or appeal that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. The statute contains an exception if the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.

The court relied on two earlier federal decisions—including one from the District of Minnesota—that had found Jackson had three qualifying dismissals, often called “strikes.” The court agreed with those decisions and found that Jackson was subject to the three-strikes restriction.

Court’s analysis

Jackson’s request focused on the presence of COVID-19 at the Minnesota Correctional Facility–Stillwater. The court concluded that this did not meet the imminent-danger exception because Jackson provided no individualized information showing that the facility’s COVID-19 conditions placed him personally at a heightened risk of serious physical injury. The court agreed with decisions holding that generalized concerns about possible COVID-19 exposure are insufficient to establish imminent danger under § 1915(g).

Disposition

The court denied Jackson’s request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. It directed the clerk to notify the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit that the application had been denied. This order addressed the payment-fee request; the opinion does not state that the court decided the merits of Jackson’s underlying civil case or the appeal.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court decided whether Jackson could proceed without prepaying appeal fees and did not decide the underlying legal claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.