Tasby v. Wheatly
Filing
9
Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations; Finding that Plaintiff is BARRED from Proceeding IFP under 28 USC 1915(g) and ORDERING PLAINTIFF TO PAY A FULL FILING FEE. Leon Tasby shall pay $350.00 WITHIN 10 days of the date of this order, Mot ions terminated: 6 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis with certificate of trust account filed by Leon Tasby, 7 Findings and Recommendations on Case re: 5 Complaint, filed by Leon Tasby, 1 Complaint, filed by Leon Tasby. Magistrate Judge Jeffrey L Cureton no longer assigned to case.. re: 7 Findings and Recommendations on Case ..cy as fyi to Betty Parker EDTX (Ordered by Judge Terry R Means on 10/24/2012) (wrb) Modified on 10/24/2012 (wrb).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH DIVISION
LEON TASBY,
aka Tony Hendricks
(TDCJ # 1760659)
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
VS.
MARIA MARIS, et al.
CIVIL NO.4:12-CV-581-Y
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION;
FINDING THAT PLAINTIFF IS BARRED FROM PROCEEDING
IN FORMA PAUPERIS UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g);
AND ORDERING PLAINTIFF TO PAY A FULL FILING FEE
This civil action was initiated by the filing of a form civil
complaint by Texas Department of Criminal Justice (“TDCJ”) inmate
Leon Tasby. Plaintiff Tasby is also know as Tony Hendricks. On
September
17,
2012,
the
magistrate
judge
entered
a
findings
conclusions and recommendation that Plaintiff not be allowed to
proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 because he previously incurred more
than three “strikes” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and had not claimed
in this case that he was under imminent danger of serous physical
injury.1
The report also recommended that Plaintiff be required to
pay the full filing fee and that because Plaintiff has repeatedly
filed suits even though he has been informed of the application of
§ 1915(g), he should be warned that if he files another civil
action without paying the full filing fee (unless accompanied by a
1
As a result of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) amendments to 28
U.S.C. 1915, section 1915(g) provides that a prisoner may not proceed in forma
pauperis in a civil action if, on three or more occasions, the prisoner had a
case dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim, unless
the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C.A. §
1915(g)(West 2006).
claim that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury)
he will be subject to the imposition of sanctions.
The magistrate judge gave Tasley until October 7, 2012, to
file
written
objections
recommendation (doc. 7).
to
the
findings,
conclusions,
and
As of the date of this order, no written
objections have been filed.
The Court has reviewed the pleadings and the record in this
case and has reviewed for clear error the findings, conclusions,
and recommendation. The Court concludes that, for the reasons
stated by the magistrate judge, Plaintiff is not entitled to
proceed in forma pauperis and must pay the filing fee. Any warning
about the filing of future suits will be included if Plaintiff does
not subsequently pay the filing fee
Therefore, the findings, conclusions and recommendation of the
magistrate judge are ADOPTED.
Plaintiff Leon Tasby a/k/a Tony Hendricks (TDCJ No.
1760659)
is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. If
Plaintiff wishes to proceed with this action, he must pay to the
clerk of Court the full filing fee of $350.00 within ten (10) days
of the date of this order.2 Plaintiff is advised that failure to
timely pay the full filing fee to the clerk of Court could result
2
Although the Court would normally give an inmate plaintiff thirty days to
pay a filing fee, as Plaintiff has been repeatedly notified of the bar to filing
under § 1915(g) and has then failed to pay the fee within thirty days, the Court
concludes that ten days to comply is sufficient.
2
in the dismissal of this action without further notice pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).3
SIGNED October 24, 2012.
____________________________
TERRY R. MEANS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
See Hickerson v. Christian, 283 Fed. Appx. 251 (June 24, 2008)(A district
court may sua sponte dismiss an action for failure to prosecute under Rule
41(b)); see also Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626 (1962)(a court may dismiss
for lack of prosecution under its inherent authority).
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?