Parrish v. Larned State Hospital et al
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Plaintiff is granted thirty (30) days from the date of this order to submit the $350.00 filing fee. The failure to pay the full filing fee by that time will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice. Plaintiff's motion 2 for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 4/12/2011. (Mailed to pro se party Daniel Joseph Parrish by regular mail.) (smnd)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
DANIEL JOSEPH PARRISH,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION
No. 11-3054-SAC
vs.
LARNED STATE HOSPITAL, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, a prisoner in state custody, brings a civil
rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in which he complains
that the defendants, a state mental hospital and its accounting
office, have obstructed legal process by delaying or refusing to
issue a check for typewriter ribbons.
It appears plaintiff has
been advised to purchase the ribbons from another source.
The Prison Litigation Reform Act substantially altered the
manner in which indigent prisoners may proceed in the United
States
District
Courts.
Significant
to
the
present
case,
§1915(g) provides that:
"In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or
appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding
under this section if the prisoner 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, unless the
prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical
injury." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Court
records
in
the
District
of
Kansas
reflect
that
plaintiff has filed more than thirty cases in this court, and
that at least three of those cases were dismissed for failure to
state a claim for relief.1
The court has examined the present complaint and finds no
basis to conclude that plaintiff should be allowed to proceed in
this matter without the prepayment of the full filing fee.
Plaintiff’s claim does not suggest that he is in imminent danger
of serious physical harm. Accordingly, plaintiff may proceed in
this action only if he pays the filing fee of $350.00 that is
charged for filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C.
1 Plaintiff has filed cases under different names,
including Daniel Joseph Kirwan, Michael Duane Pyle, Daniel
Joseph Parrish, Daniel Parrado, and Daniel Parrish-Parrado.
The cases identified as the basis of this order are Case No.
92-3357, Kirwan v. Larned Mental Health, 816 F. Supp. 672
(D. Kan. 1993)(dismissing as legally frivolous plaintiff’s
claims that officials’ continued use of his former legal
name, under which he was convicted, violated his
constitutional rights); Case No. 91-3217, Kirwan v. Huggins,
1991 WL 158842 (dismissing as frivolous plaintiff’s claim of
excessive heat and lack of electric fan); and Case No. 883416, Kirwan v. Appel, 1988 WL 142902 (dismissing for
failure to state a claim plaintiff’s allegations of denial
of use of a typewriter, writing table, and chair, and
allegations that defendant corrections employees sabotaged a
cell house and criminally defamed plaintiff).
2
§ 1983.
IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COURT ORDERED that plaintiff is
granted thirty (30) days from the date of this Order to submit
the $350.00 filing fee.
The failure to pay the full filing fee
by that time will result in the dismissal of this action without
prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiff’s motion for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is denied.
A copy of this order shall be transmitted to the plaintiff.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated at Topeka, Kansas, this 12th day of April, 2011.
S/ Sam A. Crow
SAM A. CROW
United States Senior District Judge
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?