Moore v. Minnesota Department of Corrections
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:24-cv-00436
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Moore v. Minnesota Department of Corrections, Judge Blackwell overruled Moore’s objection to an initial partial filing-fee requirement.
Anthony Moore, whose objection was overruled and who remains subject to the initial partial filing-fee requirement described in the order.
What happened
In Moore v. Minnesota Department of Corrections, Anthony Moore objected to a magistrate judge’s order requiring him to pay an initial partial filing fee under a federal statute governing people who cannot prepay filing fees.
Moore argued that the fee requirement was unfair and that he could not pay any amount. The court reviewed the objection under a highly deferential standard and examined materials showing an average balance in Moore’s prison trust-fund account.
The court found no clear error and concluded that the magistrate judge correctly ordered a partial fee because funds existed in Moore’s account. Judge Jerry W. Blackwell overruled Moore’s objection; the court did not decide the merits of Moore’s complaint.
The detailed version
- Moore v. Minnesota Department of Corrections · No. 0:24-cv-00436
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Mar. 1, 2024
Background
Anthony Moore objected to Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty’s February 20, 2024 order requiring him to pay an initial partial filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). The case caption also names employees and officials of the Minnesota Department of Corrections and the Bureau of Criminal Apprehensions, sued in their individual and official capacities.
Moore argued that requiring a partial fee was unfair and asserted that he could not pay any amount. The materials attached to his application to proceed without prepaying filing fees showed an average balance in his prison trust-fund account. The governing statute requires collection of a partial filing fee “when funds exist.”
Standard of Review
Because the objection concerned a magistrate judge’s order on a nondispositive matter, the court reviewed the order for clear error under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), and the District of Minnesota’s local rules. Clear-error review is highly deferential and requires a definite and firm conviction that a mistake was made.
Ruling
The court found no clear error. It concluded that Magistrate Judge Docherty correctly ordered the initial partial filing fee based on evidence that funds existed in Moore’s account. The court also noted that the magistrate judge had warned Moore that his complaint had significant problems and would face serious challenges on the merits, but the court did not decide those merits.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell ordered that Moore’s objection to Magistrate Judge Docherty’s February 20, 2024 order was OVERRULED.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.