Erby v. Luttrell et al
ORDER SEVERING CLAIMS, GRANTING PLAINTIFF MORROW LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, AND ASSESSING $350 FILING FEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLRA. Signed by Judge James D. Todd on 3/23/17. (Todd, James)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
EARL MORROW, ET AL.,
MARK H. LUTTRELL, ET AL.,
ORDER SEVERING CLAIMS,
GRANTING PLAINTIFF MORROW LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS,
AND ASSESSING $350 FILING FEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLRA
On June 23 2016, Earl Morrow, Fred Erby, and Wayne Shannon, who are all incarcerated
at the Shelby County Correctional Center (“SCCC’), in Memphis Tennessee, filed a pro se
complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) All of the Plaintiffs signed the complaint;
however, only Plaintiff Morrow submitted an in forma pauperis application (ECF No. 2), as
required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)-(b). On July 25,
2016, a motion to amend was filed that is signed only by Plaintiff Morrow. (ECF No. 4.) On
August 8, 2016, a motion to appoint counsel was filed, purportedly on behalf of both Plaintiff
Morrow and Plaintiff Erby; however, it is signed only by Erby. (ECF No. 5.) An amended
complaint was filed on November 23, 2016, that is also signed only by Plaintiff Erby. (ECF No.
It is not practicable for three inmates to litigate their claims in a single action. Therefore,
the Court hereby SEVERS the claims of Plaintiffs Erby and Shannon from this action. The
Clerk is DIRECTED to open new civil actions for Plaintiffs Erby and Shannon. In Plaintiff
Erby’s case, the Clerk shall docket the original complaint, the motion to appoint counsel and the
In Plaintiff Shannon’s case, the Clerk shall docket only the original
complaint. The instant case will proceed with Earl Morrow as the sole Plaintiff.
Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)-(b), a prisoner
bringing a civil action must pay the filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a).1 Although the
obligation to pay the fee accrues at the moment the case is filed, see McGore v. Wrigglesworth,
114 F.3d 601, 605 (6th Cir. 1997), partially overruled on other grounds by LaFountain v. Harry,
716 F.3d 944, 951 (6th Cir. 2013), the PLRA provides the prisoner the opportunity to make a
“down payment” of a partial filing fee and pay the remainder in installments. Id. at 604. In this
case, Plaintiff Morrow has submitted a properly completed in forma pauperis affidavit and a
copy of his inmate trust account statement. Therefore, Plaintiff Morrow’s motion to proceed in
forma pauperis is GRANTED in accordance with the terms of the PLRA.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), it is ORDERED that Plaintiff Morrow cooperate
fully with prison officials in carrying out this order. It is further ORDERED that the trust fund
officer at Plaintiff Morrow’s prison shall calculate a partial initial filing fee equal to twenty
percent (20%) of the greater of the average balance in or deposits to Plaintiff Morrow’s trust
fund account for the six months immediately preceding the completion of the affidavit. When
the account contains any funds, the trust fund officer shall collect them and pay them directly to
Twenty-eight U.S.C. § 1914(a) requires a civil filing fee of $350. However, pursuant to
§ 1914(b), “[t]he clerk shall collect from the parties such additional fees . . . as are prescribed by
the Judicial Conference of the United States.” The Judicial Conference has prescribed an
additional administrative fee of $50 for filing any civil case, except for cases seeking habeas
corpus and cases in which the plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28
U.S.C. § 1915. Thus, if any Plaintiff is ultimately granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, he
will not be liable for the additional $50 fee.
the Clerk of the Court. If the funds in Plaintiff Morrow’s account are insufficient to pay the full
amount of the initial partial filing fee, the prison official is instructed to withdraw all of the funds
in the Plaintiff Morrow’s account and forward them to the Clerk of the Court.
On each occasion that funds are subsequently credited to Plaintiff Morrow’s account the
prison official shall immediately withdraw those funds and forward them to the Clerk of Court,
until the initial filing fee is paid in full.
It is further ORDERED that after the initial partial filing fee is fully paid, the trust fund
officer shall withdraw from Plaintiff Morrow’s account and pay to the Clerk of this Court
monthly payments equal to twenty percent (20%) of all deposits credited to Plaintiff Morrow’s
account during the preceding month, but only when the amount in the account exceeds $10, until
the entire $350 filing fee is paid.
Each time the trust fund officer makes a payment to the Court as required by this order,
he shall print a copy of the prisoner’s account statement showing all activity in the account since
the last payment under this order and submit it to the Clerk along with the payment. All
payments and accounts statements shall be sent to:
Clerk, United States District Court, Western District of Tennessee
167 N. Main St., Rm. 242, Memphis TN 38103
and shall clearly identify Plaintiff Morrow’s name and the case number as included on the first
page of this order.
If Plaintiff Morrow is transferred to a different prison or released, he is ORDERED to
notify the Court immediately, in writing, of his change of address. If still confined, he shall
provide the officials at the new facility with a copy of this order.
The Clerk shall mail a copy of this order to the prison official in charge of prison trust
fund accounts at the Plaintiff Morrow’s prison. The Clerk is further ORDERED to forward a
copy of this order to the Director of the SCCC to ensure that the custodian of the Plaintiff
Morrow’s inmate trust account complies with that portion of the PLRA pertaining to the payment
of filing fees.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ James D. Todd
JAMES D. TODD
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?