Redding v. Schnell
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:21-cv-01930
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Redding v. Schnell, Judge Menendez ordered Nico Redding to provide a prison-account statement and denied his record-related motions as moot.
Nico Redding, who must provide the required prison trust-account statement and remains responsible for paying the $505 appellate filing fee through the installment process; his record-related motions were denied as moot.
What happened
In Redding v. Schnell, the Eighth Circuit dismissed Nico Redding’s appeal and sent the case back so the District of Minnesota could calculate and collect his appellate filing fees. Although Redding was allowed to proceed without paying the full fee upfront, he still owes the $505 fee in installments because he is in prison.
Redding had not provided a certified prison trust-account statement covering the six months before he applied to proceed without paying the fee. Judge Menendez ordered him to file that statement within 21 days. If he does not, the court will set the initial partial payment at $35 or another reasonable amount based on the available information.
Judge Menendez also denied as moot Redding’s two motions concerning the record on appeal. The order addressed filing-fee procedures and those motions; it did not decide the underlying claims in the case.
The detailed version
- Redding v. Schnell · No. 0:21-cv-01930
- Katherine Menendez
- July 18, 2022
Background
On July 6, 2022, the court granted Nico Redding permission to proceed without paying the full appellate filing fee upfront. The Eighth Circuit later dismissed Redding’s appeal and remanded the case with instructions for the district court to calculate and collect the appellate filing fees under Henderson v. Norris and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b).
Because Redding is in prison, permission to proceed without paying the fee upfront did not eliminate his obligation to pay the $505 appellate filing fee. The fee must be paid in installments, including an initial partial payment if he has sufficient funds and later periodic deductions from his prison trust account. The payments remain due regardless of the outcome of the appeal.
Court’s Reasoning
Redding provided information showing that he qualified financially to proceed without paying the fee upfront, but he did not provide a certified copy of his prison trust-account statement for the six-month period immediately before filing his notice of appeal. Without that statement, the court could not calculate the initial partial filing fee under the usual formula, which uses 20 percent of the greater of the average monthly deposits or average monthly balance during the relevant six-month period.
The court noted that the 30-day period described in Henderson had not yet expired. Redding applied for permission to proceed without paying the fee upfront on July 5, 2022, so the court gave him an opportunity to provide the required account statement before setting the initial payment. If he did not provide it within the required period, the court would calculate the initial partial fee at $35 or another reasonable amount supported by the available information.
Disposition
The court ordered Redding to file, within 21 days of the order, a certified copy of his prison trust-account statement for the six-month period immediately before July 5, 2022. The court also denied as moot Redding’s motions concerning the record on appeal, listed as ECF Nos. 98 and 99. The order did not reach the merits of the underlying case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.
Related cases
- Triple S Farms LLC, Green Acres Dairy, LLC, Charles Fry and Emily Snyder, Rocky…Jul 2026
- United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Carebourn Capital, L.P…Mar 2026
- Event Sales, Inc. v. The TJX Companies, Inc.; Federal Express Corporation…Feb 2026
- J.V.v. Asset Vision
- Stotesberyv. Muy Pizza-Tejas
- Paula A.v. O'Malley