Vaughns v. Levertt et al

Filing 6

ORDER. The Court overrules the objections re 5 Appeal of Magistrate Judge Decision to District Court filed by Johnny L. Vaughns. The Court will extend the original 21 day payment deadline until Friday, October 9, 2015. If Plaintiff fails to pay the $400 by this date, his case will be dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 9/25/15. (aeh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION

JOHNNY L. VAUGHNS,
Plaintiff,
CV 115-132

MAJOR LEVERTT; DEPUTY YOUNG;
DEPUTY KITCHENS; DEPUTY JUDY;
LT. ELIAM; and
SHERIFF RICHARD ROUNDTREE,
Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff, currently incarcerated at Central State Prison in Macon, Georgia, submitted

to the Court for filing a complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. His complaint
raises claims concerning events that allegedly occurred at the Charles B. Webster Detention
Center in Augusta, Georgia, and Plaintiff requested permission to proceed informa pauperis
("IFP"). (Doc. no. 2.)

By Order dated August 31, 2015, the Magistrate Judge denied the request to proceed
IFP and directed Plaintiff to submit the full $400.00 filing fee within twenty-one days.

(Doc. no. 4.) The Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiffs Prisoner Trust Fund Account
Statement submitted with the IFP motion showed a spendable balance of $1,514.65 and that

in the six months prior to filing the lawsuit on August 21, 2015, Plaintiff had received

deposits totaling nearly $3,000.00. (See id; see also doc. no. 2, p. 3.) Thus, the Magistrate

Judge concluded that Plaintiff had sufficient funds to pay the full filing fee.

Plaintiff objects to this ruling and requests that he be granted permission to proceed
IFP. (Doc. no. 5.) Plaintiff states he never received deposits as described by the Magistrate
Judge, asserting that he only received $300.00 on two occasions. (Id.) Plaintiff further states
that he recently had to send $500.00 to his family to pay for the preparation of his trial

transcripts, and the current spendable balance in his Trust Account is $966.14. (Id.) He has
attached an updated Trust Account Statement to his objections which reveals a "Spendable

Amount" of $965.14 and no "Obligations/Court Charges" owed. (Id at 3.)
The Court modifies or sets aside non-dispositive rulings by the Magistrate Judge

that are "clearly erroneous or . . . contrary to law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). A ruling is clearly
erroneous when the Magistrate Judge abuses his discretion or the District Judge "is left with
a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made." Jackson v. Deen, CV 412-139,

2013 WL 3991793, at *2 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 2, 2013.) A ruling is contrary to law when it fails
to follow or misapplies the law. Id

Here, the Magistrate Judge correctly explained that although poverty sufficient to

qualify under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 does not require penniless destitution, proceeding IFP is a

privilege, not a right. See Rowland v. California Men's Colony, Unit II Men's Advisory
Council 506 U.S. 194, 198 (1993).

Plaintiffs Trust Account Statement as originally

submitted with the IFP motion and as updated in the current objections shows additions to
his Trust Account on five occasions from February 21, 2015 through July 1, 2015 in the

following amounts: $300.00, $300.00, $52.00, $25.00, and $1,671.73. (Doc. no. 2, p. 3;

doc. no. 5, p. 3.) Although these amounts do not total exactly $3,000.00, they do evidence
more than two deposits as claimed by Plaintiff and more than enough funds to cover the

$400.00 filing fee. The Trust Account also shows that since February 23, 2015, Plaintiff has
made store purchases of nearly $60.00 on an almost weekly basis. (Id. at 3-5.) Finally,
although Plaintiffs spendable amount has now decreased from $1,514.65 to $965.14, he still

has well in excess of the $400.00 filing fee at his disposal.
Because the challenged ruling is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court

OVERRULES the objections, (doc. no. 5). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); Loc. R. 72.2; Stalev v.

Owens, 367 F. App'x 102, 104 n.l (11th Cir. 2010). The Court will extend the original

twenty-one day payment deadline until Friday, October 9, 2015. If Plaintiff fails to pay the

$400.00 by this date, his case will be dismissed without prejudice.

SO ORDERED this^5*ck^ofSeptember, 20lS^^tAu^usta, Georgia.
HONORABLE J. RANDAL HALL

united/tates DISTRICT JUDGE
^SDUTtfERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA