Rutledge v. City of Danville, Va et al

Filing 7

PRE-FILING INJUNCTION. Signed by Judge Jackson L. Kiser on 12/9/13. (ham)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
DANVILLE DIVISION
MERLE T. RUTLEDGE, JR,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF DANVILLE, VA, ET AL,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:13-cv-00066
PRE-FILING INJUNCTION
By: Hon. Jackson L. Kiser
Senior United States District Judge

Plaintiff Merle T. Rutledge, Jr (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed an application in this
Court to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on November 18, 2013. On November 21, 2013, I
denied Plaintiff’s IFP application and issued an Order to Show Cause why Plaintiff should not be
subject to a pre-filing injunction [ECF No. 4]. Plaintiff appeared before this Court on December
5, 2013, and was provided an opportunity to be heard on the matter. Given Plaintiff’s history of
frivolous litigation, I find it likely that he will “continue to abuse the judicial process and harass
other parties.” See Safir v. United States Lines, Inc., 792 F.2d 19, 24 (2d Cir. 1986).
For reasons to be stated with more detail in a forthcoming Memorandum Opinion,
Plaintiff is hereby ENJOINED as follows:
1)

Plaintiff, and anyone acting on his behalf, is hereby enjoined from filing any new action
or proceeding in any federal court within the Commonwealth of Virginia, without first
obtaining leave of that court;

2)

Plaintiff, and anyone acting on his behalf, is hereby enjoined from filing any further
papers or pleadings in any case, either pending or terminated, in the Western District of
Virginia, without first obtaining leave of the court;

3)

Leave will be forthcoming upon Plaintiff’s demonstration, through a properly filed
motion, that the proposed filing: (1) can survive a challenge under Rule 12 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure; (2) is not repetitive or violative of a court order; and (3) is in
compliance with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

4)

Plaintiff, and anyone acting on his behalf, is hereby required to submit a copy of this PreFiling Injunction and accompanying Memorandum Opinion as a necessary component of
any request for leave which he attempts to file in any federal court; and

5)

Plaintiff is hereby enjoined from providing legal advice or counsel to any other person or
entity, and is advised that the unauthorized practice of law is a Class 1 Misdemeanor in
the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Plaintiff is hereby advised that I will summarily deny any motion or action that does not strictly
comply with this Pre-Filing Injunction and which fails to show good cause why Plaintiff should
be permitted to file a new civil action.
The Clerk is instructed not to accept for filing any papers from Plaintiff or anyone acting
on his behalf that are not accompanied by a signed order from a judge in compliance with the
directions that I have provided.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff.
ENTERED this 9th day of December, 2013.

s/Jackson L. Kiser
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE