Wagoner v. B.H.C.F.

Background

Tina Lynn Wagoner, who was incarcerated at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, filed a pro se complaint without paying the filing fee. She did not submit an application to proceed without paying fees or a prisoner authorization, but the court treated the complaint as requesting that status.

The complaint alleged that prison officials improperly deducted money from Wagoner’s prisoner account and that she was entitled to a $3.00 increase in her hourly wage. The opinion does not decide whether those allegations were legally valid.

Three-Strikes Rule

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has brought three or more prior actions or appeals that were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim generally may not bring a new civil action without paying the filing fee. An exception applies if the prisoner alleges that she is in imminent danger of serious physical injury—that is, a danger existing when the complaint is filed.

The court stated that Wagoner was already barred from filing new actions without paying fees while incarcerated. It found that her complaint did not allege imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Ruling

The court denied Wagoner’s request to proceed without paying fees and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes rule. The dismissal without prejudice means the order did not bar her from starting a new action by paying the required fees. The court also stated that she remains barred from proceeding without paying fees in future actions while in custody unless she alleges imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Judge Colleen McMahon certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. The order also noted that a new complaint filed after payment of the fee would be reviewed under the prisoner-screening statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.