Gibson v. Unknown Male patients & Social Workers
Gibson v. Unknown Male patients & Social Workers, Doctors, Administrators, Nurses etc of Lawrence Nursing
- Louis Stanton
- 1:19-cv-00204
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Gibson v. Employees, Judge Stanton denied fee-waiver status and dismissed the action without prejudice under the prisoner three-strikes rule.
Bennie Gibson’s ability to proceed without paying the filing fee in this action was affected. The action was dismissed without prejudice, subject to his paying $400 within 30 days.
What happened
Bennie Gibson, who was representing himself, sued employees and others connected with medical facilities. He asked to proceed without paying the filing fee while he was incarcerated, and the court reviewed whether the prisoner three-strikes rule allowed that request.
The court found that Gibson had at least three earlier cases or appeals dismissed as frivolous or for failing to state a claim. It also found that his complaint did not show he faced an immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed it, so the exception to the three-strikes rule did not apply.
Judge Stanton denied Gibson’s amended request to proceed without paying the fee and dismissed the action without prejudice. Gibson was given 30 days to pay the required $400 fee to bring the action, and the court denied his other requests for relief as moot.
The detailed version
- Gibson v. Unknown Male patients & Social Workers · No. 1:19-cv-00204
- Louis Stanton
- Dec. 23, 2019
Background
Bennie Gibson filed this civil action while held at the North Infirmary Command on Rikers Island. He asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court had previously directed him to explain why it should not deny that request and dismiss the action under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), a federal law that limits fee-free lawsuits by prisoners with three qualifying prior dismissals.
Gibson was representing himself. The opinion states that his claims appeared to concern allegedly poor medical care received during earlier periods of incarceration or while he was treated at hospitals and a nursing home.
Three-strikes finding
The PLRA’s three-strikes provision generally bars a prisoner from bringing a civil action without paying the filing fee if, on three or more earlier occasions while incarcerated or detained, the prisoner brought an action or appeal that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failing to state a claim. The exception applies when the prisoner shows that he faced an immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint.
The court determined that Gibson had at least three qualifying strikes before filing this action. The listed prior dismissals included cases dismissed as frivolous and cases dismissed for failure to state a claim. The court also noted that Gibson had previously been recognized as disqualified from proceeding without paying the fee and had been given opportunities to argue that the earlier dismissals should not count.
The court concluded that Gibson’s complaint did not allege facts showing an immediate danger of serious physical injury at the time of filing. The court stated that the claims did not appear to arise from events occurring while he was held at the North Infirmary Command, and that his later submissions did not change that conclusion.
Rulings
The court denied Gibson’s amended application to proceed without paying the filing fee. It dismissed the action without prejudice under the PLRA’s three-strikes provision, meaning the opinion did not bar him from bringing the action after paying the required fee. The court granted him 30 days from the order’s date to pay $400 to bring the action.
The court denied all other requests for relief as moot. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for an appeal. The order states that if Gibson did not pay the fee within the allowed period, the court would enter a judgment dismissing the action without prejudice under the same provision.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.