Goins et al v. South Carolina Department of Corrections et al

Filing 9

ORDER to break-out. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 08/03/2012. (dsto, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Michael Goins, also known as Michael D. Goins; Travon
Keith; Gary Miles; Jervon R. Clark; Michael Jones; DeShawn
Williams; Montrel Perry; Tamel Davis; Ricardo Hooks;
Kerwin Johnson; Maurice Council; Olayinko Adama
Babatunde; Dustin Tiller; Maurice Bufford; Efrain Thomas;
Chris Dunbar; Dominic Williams; Kendall Green; Demetrious
Jones,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
South Carolina Department of Corrections, SCDC; Perry
Correctional Institution, PCI; Special Management Unit, SMU;
Officer Gibson; Lt. Horne; Sgt. Wilson; Lt. Lasley; Lt.
DeGeorgis; Lt. Madden; Capt. Abston; Sgt. Moody; Cpl.
Brown; Sgt. Lawless; Ofc. Sams; Ofc. McBride; Sgt. Nally;
Lt. Church; Ofc. Binkley,
Defendants.
_______________________________________________

) C/A No. 4:12-01924-CMC-TER
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

This is a civil rights action filed by multiple state prisoners, proceeding pro se. The
Fourth Circuit has held that “the competence of a layman representing himself” is “clearly too
limited to allow him to risk the rights of others.” Oxendine v. Williams, 509 F.2d 1405, 1407
(4th Cir. 1975)(holding that a prisoner, proceeding pro se, cannot represent other prisoners in
a class action); see also Hummer v. Dalton, 657 F.2d 621, 625-26 (4th Cir. 1981)(suit is
“confined to redress for violation of his own personal rights and not one by him as a knighterrant for all prisoners”). Therefore, to the extent Plaintiffs wish to bring a class action lawsuit,
they cannot do so.
Although this case cannot proceed as a class action lawsuit, the complaint and amended
complaint have been signed by multiple prisoners, indicating a desire to litigate issues
concerning the conditions of their confinement. Because the Plaintiffs are prisoners, the Prison

Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996), applies to this
case. The PLRA requires prisoners to pay the full three hundred and fifty-dollar ($350.00)
filing fee for a civil action, as funds are available, although the fee may be paid in installments.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b); Green v. Young, 454 F.3d 405, 407 (4th Cir. 2006). The Fourth Circuit has
not addressed the issue of fee payment in a case filed by multiple plaintiffs subject to the PLRA.
However, the undersigned is persuaded by the reasoning of the Eleventh Circuit in Hubbard v.
Haley, 262 F.3d 1194, 1197-98 (11th Cir. 2001), which held that multiple prisoners are not
allowed to join together in a single lawsuit. Because the PLRA’s requirement, that a prisoner
pay the full fee for filing a lawsuit, would be circumvented in a multiple plaintiff case subject
to the PLRA, Hubbard held that it was appropriate to sever the claims and require each
prisoner to file a separate lawsuit. Id. at 1198.1
Accordingly, the undersigned concludes that the Plaintiffs’ claims should be
separated for initial review.
TO THE CLERK OF COURT:
The Office of the Clerk of Court is directed to maintain this case as the “Lead Case”
brought by the first Plaintiff named above (Michael Goins). The Clerk of Court is further
directed to assign separate civil action numbers to each of the eighteen remaining Plaintiffs
listed in the caption of this Order. The original of this Order shall be maintained in the present
1

A prisoner must also exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit for
civil rights violations. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 85
(2006);Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 524 (2002). Just as payment of one filing fee
does not cover multiple plaintiffs under the PLRA, exhaustion of administrative
remedies by one prisoner does not meet the exhaustion requirement for all of the
plaintiffs.

2

file, and copies of this Order and all documents from this case shall be placed in the new case
files. After docketing this Order, the Clerk shall terminate the eighteen other Plaintiffs as
parties in this case, leaving Michael Goins as the sole Plaintiff in this action. The defendants
in the new cases will be the same defendants listed in the caption of this Order. The initial
document entry on the docket in the new cases will be this Order. The Clerk of Court is further
authorized to re-file the complaint and amended complaint from this case in the new cases as
one docket entry to be referenced as the “complaint,” and to process the new cases as prisoner
civil rights actions. The Clerk of Court shall determine the most efficient way and time for
assigning case numbers and entering the new case numbers, party information, and pleading
information on the Court’s docket in the Electronic Case Filing system.
After the new cases are docketed, the assigned Magistrate Judge is authorized to issue
orders pursuant to the General Order issued in In Re: Procedures in Civil Actions Filed by
Prisoner Pro Se Litigants, 3:07-mc-5014-JFA (D.S.C. Sept. 18, 2007), and conduct initial
reviews in compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Cameron McGowan Currie
CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Columbia, South Carolina
August 3, 2012

3