Benz-Whitebird v. Centurion of Minnesota L.L.C.
- Dulce Foster
- 0:23-cv-00469
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 4
Benz-Whitebird v. Centurion: Judge Foster required a $25.65 initial fee and denied counsel without prejudice.
Daniel Patrick Benz-Whitebird must pay at least $25.65 by May 9, 2023, followed by installments toward the remaining $350 statutory filing fee if she continues the case. Her request for appointed counsel was denied without prejudice, and nonpayment could lead to a recommendation that the case be dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
In Benz-Whitebird v. Centurion of Minnesota L.L.C., Daniel Patrick Benz-Whitebird filed a civil-rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront. The court also considered her request for appointed counsel.
The court ordered Benz-Whitebird to pay an initial partial filing fee of $25.65 by May 9, 2023. If she paid it, she would still have to pay the remaining balance of the $350 statutory filing fee through installments from her prison account. If she did not pay, the court said it would likely recommend dismissing the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Judge Dulce J. Foster denied the request for appointed counsel without prejudice. The court found no current reason to believe the case was factually or legally complex and found that Benz-Whitebird had presented her allegations clearly enough at that stage.
The detailed version
- Benz-Whitebird v. Centurion of Minnesota L.L.C. · No. 0:23-cv-00469
- Dulce J. Foster
- Apr. 18, 2023
Background
Daniel Patrick Benz-Whitebird filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Paul Schnell and other defendants. The opinion states that Benz-Whitebird did not pay the filing fee and instead applied for permission to proceed without paying it in advance. She also moved for appointment of counsel.
Initial filing fee
Because Benz-Whitebird is incarcerated, the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires a prisoner who proceeds without paying the fee upfront to pay the statutory filing fee in installments. The court calculated the initial partial filing fee using the average monthly deposits and average monthly balance in her prison trust account during the six months before filing. The average monthly deposits were $128.26, and the average monthly balance was $30.23. Because the deposits were higher, the court calculated 20 percent of $128.26, or $25.65.
The court ordered Benz-Whitebird to pay at least $25.65 by May 9, 2023. The order states that the action would not go forward until that initial amount was paid. If she paid it, prison officials would deduct payments toward the remaining balance of the $350 statutory filing fee from her account. The court also stated that failure to pay could lead to a recommendation that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The order did not itself dismiss the case.
Appointment of counsel
Benz-Whitebird argued that counsel should be appointed because she could not afford a lawyer, the case was complex, she had limited access to legal resources, she might need an expert witness, several attorneys had not responded to her, and she had limited knowledge of the law and court procedures.
The court explained that civil litigants generally have no constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel. It considered the factual and legal complexity of the case, Benz-Whitebird’s ability to investigate and present her claims, the possibility of conflicting testimony, and the complexity of the legal issues. At this early stage, the court found no reason to believe the action was particularly complex and concluded that Benz-Whitebird had expressed her positions and allegations clearly enough. It therefore denied the motion to appoint counsel without prejudice.
Disposition
The court ordered payment of the $25.65 initial partial filing fee by May 9, 2023, stated that nonpayment would likely result in a recommendation of dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute, and denied the motion to appoint counsel without prejudice.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.