Hood v. Page et al

Filing 76

RULING denying 75 Motion for Reconsideration of the 74 Order Revoking In Forma Pauperis status. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger on 12/18/2013. (JDL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

CAREY LOUIS HOOD (#299810)
VERSUS

CIVIL ACTION

DORTHY PAGE, ET AL

NUMBER 12-287-SDD-SCR

RULING ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Before the court is the plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsideration.
Record document number 75.
On December 11, 2013, the plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status
was revoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).1

Plaintiff is now

before the court seeking reconsideration of the Order Revoking In
Forma Pauperis status on the ground that he has not accumulated
three strikes.
Plaintiff conceded that he accumulated a strike in CV 10-158JVP-SCR, and apparently does not dispute that he accumulated a
strike on appeal in CV 13-303-JJB-SCR.

However, he contends that

he did not accumulate a strike in CV 09-950-JTT-JDK.

Plaintiff

argued that although the district court granted a motion to dismiss
for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and
he appealed the dismissal, the appeal was later dismissed pursuant
to his motion and should not count as a strike.
On November 5, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for
1

Record document number 74, Order Revoking In Forma Pauperis
Status.

the Fifth Circuit determined that the plaintiff has accumulated at
least three strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and that he may not
proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed in a
court of the United States while he is incarcerated or detained in
any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical
injury.

See Carey Louis Hood v. Kimberly Vessel, et al, No. 13-

30592 (5th Cir. November 5, 2013).
There is no indication in the record that the Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals considered the appeal in CV 09-950-JTT-JDK as a
strike.

Rather, it appears from a review of the record in CV 09-

950-JTT-JDK that the Fifth Circuit considered as a strike the June
23, 2010 ruling granting the defendants’ Supplemental Motion to
Dismiss (record document number 27) which dismissed the plaintiff’s
claims against Burl Cain and James LeBlanc in their entirety, and
from which the plaintiff appealed.2
The

Fifth

Circuit

Court

of

Appeals

determined

that

the

plaintiff has accumulated three strikes and now is barred from
proceeding in forma pauperis.
discretion

to

disregard

the

This court does not have the
appellate

court’s

determination.

Insofar as the plaintiff argued that he does not have three
strikes, his argument is unavailing.
Accordingly, the plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsideration is
2

The appellate court’s decision in No.13-30592 (M.D.La. case CV13-303) referenced the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation in CV 09-950 issued April 21, 2010, which was
later adopted by the district judge.
2

denied.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, December 18, 2013.

STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3