TANKSLEY v. MOORE et al

Filing 9

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS - Having accumulated three strikes, Mr. Tanksley may not proceed without prepaying the filing fee--unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Mr. Tanksley has not attempted to show an imminent danger of serious physical injury, so his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Dkt. #8 . Mr. Tanksley shall have through May 26, 2021, to pay the $402.00 filing fee or demonstrate an imminent danger of serious physical injury. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 4/26/2021. (KAA)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA TERRE HAUTE DIVISION DEREK J. TANKSLEY, Plaintiff, v. JAMES MOORE Officer, FRANK NEWKIRK, JR., DUSTIN HOUCHIN Washington County Prosecutor, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 2:21-cv-00125-JPH-DLP ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS Plaintiff, Derek Tanksley, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. [8]. Because Mr. Tanksley is a prisoner, this motion is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). "In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action" in forma pauperis if he has, "on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." Id. An exception applies if the plaintiff "is under imminent danger of serious physical injury." Id. In his motion, Mr. Tanksley indicates that he has previously filed at least two lawsuits in this district. Dkt. 8 at 3. One of those cases, filed while Mr. Tanksley was incarcerated at the Washington County Jail, was dismissed for failure to state a claim. Tanksley v. Washington County et al., No. 4:19-cv-48- 1 RLY-DML (Apr. 29, 2019). Mr. Tanksley has also accumulated two additional "strikes" for purposes of § 1915(g) and is therefore ineligible to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court notifies Mr. Tanksley that it has relied on the following cases in finding that he has struck out 1: • • • Tanksley v. Washington County, et al., No. 4:19-cv-48-RLY-DML, dkt. 7 (S.D. Ind. Apr. 29, 2019) ("This action is dismissed for failure to state a claim."). Tanksley v. Washington County Itself, et al., No. 4:18-cv-153-SEB-DML, dkt. 10 (S.D. Ind. Nov. 5, 2018) ("Therefore, this action is properly dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted."). Tanksley v. Moore, et al., No. 2:19-cv-555-JRS-DLP, dkt. 11 (S.D. Ind. Feb. 12, 2020) ("This action is dismissed for failure to state a claim."). Having accumulated three strikes, Mr. Tanksley may not proceed without prepaying the filing fee—unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Mr. Tanksley has not attempted to show an imminent danger of serious physical injury, so his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Dkt. [8]. Mr. Tanksley shall have through May 26, 2021, to pay the $402.00 filing fee or demonstrate an imminent danger of serious physical injury. If Mr. Tanksley fails to do so be the deadline, his case will be dismissed without prejudice. SO ORDERED. Date: 4/26/2021 Mr. Tanksley is reminded that these cases were all dismissed with prejudice, which "bars [him] from filing the claim[s] again in this court." Perdue v. Carlos, No. 2:10-cv35, 2011 WL 1792843, at *7 (N.D. Ind. May 11, 2011). 1 2 Distribution: DEREK J. TANKSLEY 242410 PUTNAMVILLE - CF PUTNAMVILLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY Electronic Service Participant – Court Only 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?