Underwood v. River North Correctional Center

Filing 9

OPINION. Signed by Judge James P. Jones on 4/12/2018. (slt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
JEFFREY LYN UNDERWOOD,
Plaintiff,
v.
RIVER NORTH CORRECTIONAL
CENTER,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 7:18CV00021
OPINION
By: James P. Jones
United States District Judge

Jeffrey Lyn Underwood, Pro Se Plaintiff.
Jeffrey Lyn Underwood, a Virginia jail inmate proceeding pro se, filed this
action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In his Amended Complaint, he alleges that prison
officials have withheld too much of his monthly income toward payment of court
fees. I conclude that the action must be summarily dismissed as legally frivolous.
Underwood pursued a prior § 1983 civil action in this court, tried his case to
a jury that ruled against him, and unsuccessfully appealed. Underwood v. Beavers,
711 F. App’x 122 (4th Cir. 2017) (unpublished). Underwood consented to have
twenty percent of his monthly income withheld toward satisfaction of this court’s
filing fee in that case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). He similarly consented to
pay the separate filing fee required by the court of appeals.

Beginning in

December 2016, the trust account officer at River North Correctional Center began

withholding forty percent of Underwood’s monthly income toward payment of the
court fees. Underwood claims that § 1915(b) authorizes withholding only twenty
percent of his income, toward payment of his court fees one at a time and demands
a refund.
Underwood’s claim is without merit. For some time, federal courts of
appeals disagreed about whether an inmate litigant must (a) pay twenty percent of
his monthly income regardless of the number of cases he has filed or (b) pay
twenty percent of his monthly income for each case he has filed. The Supreme
Court has now settled the issue by ruling that under § 1915(b), “monthly
installment payments . . . are to be assessed on a per-case basis.”
Samuels, 136 S. Ct. 627, 629 (2016).

Bruce v.

Specifically, Ҥ 1915(b)(2) calls for

simultaneous, not sequential, recoupment of multiple filing fees.” Id. at 631.
Thus, withholding forty percent of Underwood’s income each month toward
satisfaction of the two court fees he owes is lawful. Accordingly, I will summarily
dismiss this action as legally frivolous under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c)(1).
A separate Final Order will be entered herewith.
DATED: April 12, 2018
/s/ James P. Jones
United States District Judge

-2-