Alexander v. Callender et al
Filing
8
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER. Plaintiff's complaint should be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 USC 1915(g). Signed by Magistrate Judge Keith F. Giblin on 8/1/2014. (bjc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BEAUMONT DIVISION
ROBERT MITCHELL ALEXANDER
§
VS.
§
DAVID L. CALLENDER, ET AL.
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14cv351
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Robert Mitchell Alexander, an inmate confined at the Stiles Unit of the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, brings this
lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against David L. Callender, Owen Murray, Pinky Patel, and
Robert Beherns.1
Discussion
Plaintiff claims he has been denied adequate medical care by prison medical personnel and
officials with the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas.
Analysis
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) prohibits prisoners from repeatedly filing frivolous or malicious
complaints and proceeding on an in forma pauperis basis. Section 1915(g) provides as follows:
1
This case was directly assigned to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to this district’s General Order
14-10. Plaintiff has provided voluntary written consent to have the assigned United States magistrate judge conduct all
further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of final judgment in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). The
defendants in this action have not been served; thus, they are not parties to the action at this time. As a result, their
consent is not needed for the undersigned to make a final determination in this matter. See Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d
530, 532 (5th Cir. 1995).
In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action
[in forma pauperis] . . . 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.
At least four of plaintiff’s prior suits or appeals have been dismissed as frivolous or for
failure to state a claim.2 As a result, Section 1915(g) is applicable.
As set forth above, plaintiff has had at least four prior lawsuits or appeals dismissed as
frivolous, malicious, and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff
admits he is receiving medical treatment for his medical conditions including receiving medication,
numerous examinations, diagnostic testing, and even back surgery. Plaintiff states he has had some
of the conditions “since the early 2000's.” Plaintiff’s allegations that his “physical health is in
imminent danger because [he] can’t get adequate medical care” are conclusory and factually
insufficient to demonstrate he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time he filed
his complaint. See Banos v. O’Guin, 144 F.3d 883, 884 (5th Cir. 1998). Plaintiff’s complaint
amounts to a disagreement with prison medical professionals because they will not send him to an
outside hospital, specifically the VA hospital, for treatment. Section 1915(g) therefore bars plaintiff
from proceeding further with this lawsuit on an in forma pauperis basis.
2
See Alexander v. Gaiser, Civil Action No. 4:01cv590 (S.D. Tex. May 21, 2001) (dismissed as frivolous):
Alexander v. Cook, Civil Action No. 1:02cv72 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 29, 2002) (dismissed as frivolous); Alexander v. Corell,
Civil Action No. 1:04cv245 (N.D. Tex. Dec. 6, 2006) (dismissed as frivolous); and Alexander v. Eason, 1:06cv4 (N.D.
Tex. Feb. 14, 2008).
2
Order
For the reasons set forth above, plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed without prejudice
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with
this order.
Hello This is a Test
SIGNED this 1
day of
August
, 2014.
KEITH F. GIBLIN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?