Carter v. Delgado et al

Filing 8

ORDER: Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis 6 is hereby GRANTED. The plaintiff is hereby ASSESSED the civil filing fee of $350.00. The Clerk is directed to TRANSFER this case to the United States DistrictCourt for the Ea stern District of Tennessee, Southern Division at Chattanooga, Tennessee. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 3/10/14. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail. Warden by regular mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION GARY CARTER Plaintiff, v. ANDRES DELGADO, et al. Defendants. ] ] ] ] ] ] ] No. 3:14-cv-0630 (No. 3:14-mc-0058) Judge Sharp ORDER The Court is in receipt of a pro se prisoner complaint (Docket Entry No. 1) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and an application to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. 6). The plaintiff is an inmate at the Morgan County Correctional Complex in Wartburg, Tennessee. It appears from his application that he lacks sufficient financial resources from which to pay the fee required to file the complaint. Therefore, the plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby GRANTED. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). However, process shall not issue at this time. The plaintiff is hereby ASSESSED the civil filing fee of $350.00. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)(A) and (B), the custodian of the plaintiff's inmate trust account at the institution where he now resides is directed to submit to the Clerk of Court, as an initial partial payment, whichever is greater of: (a) twenty percent (20%) of the average monthly deposits to the plaintiff's inmate trust account; or (b) twenty percent (20%) of the average monthly balance in the plaintiff's inmate trust account for the prior six (6) months. Thereafter, the custodian shall submit twenty percent (20%) of the plaintiff's preceding monthly income (or income credited to the plaintiff's trust account for the preceding month), but only when such monthly income exceeds ten dollars ($10.00), until the full filing fee of three hundred fifty dollars ($350.00) as authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) has been paid to the Clerk of Court. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The plaintiff brings this action against five members of the staff at the Bledsoe County Correctional Complex, alleging that conditions of his confinement while he was an inmate there were unconstitutional. Venue for a civil rights action is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). That provision requires that an action, such as the instant case, be brought only in (1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same state, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which the defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction at the time that the action is commenced, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought. In this case, the defendants reside in or around Bledsoe County. The plaintiff's claims arose at the Correctional Complex in Bledsoe County. Since Bledsoe County lies within the Eastern District of Tennessee, 28 U.S.C. § 123(a)(3), venue for this action properly belongs in that judicial district. Accordingly, the Clerk is directed to TRANSFER this case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, Southern Division at Chattanooga, Tennessee. 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The Clerk is further instructed to send a copy of this order to the Warden of the Morgan County Correctional Complex to ensure that the custodian of the plaintiff's inmate trust account complies with that portion of the Prison Litigation Reform Act relating to the payment of the filing fee. It is so ORDERED. ____________________________ Kevin H. Sharp United States District Judge

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?