Norwood v. STRAHOTA et al

Filing 48

ORDER denying 47 Motion to Modify Payment of Filing Fees. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 9/3/2010. (jef),(ps)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN --------------------------------------------C H AR LES LAMONT NORWOOD, ORDER Plaintiff, v. G A RY HAMBLIN and SGT. LURQUIN, D e fe n d a n t s . --------------------------------------------C H AR LES LAMONT NORWOOD, P laintiff, v. C APT . RADTKE, and C.O. GRAAK, D e fe n d a n t s . --------------------------------------------C H AR LES LAMONT NORWOOD, P laintiff, v. D Y LO N RADTKE, GREG GRAMS, AMY MILLARD, TOM GOZINSKE, AMY SMITH and ANDREA NELSON, 0 7 - c v - 6 2 4 -b b c 0 7 - c v - 4 4 6 -b b c 0 4 - c v - 8 1 3 -b b c 1 D e fe n d a n t s . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -C H AR LES LAMONT NORWOOD, P laintiff, v. D O N STRAHOTA, Sergeant HILBERT, S ergean t PHILLIPS, MICHAEL THURMER, C a ptain O'DONOVAN, JAMES MUENCHOW, ICE, M IC H A E L MEISNER, ICE, and THERESA MURPHY, ICE, Defendants. -------------------------------------------C H AR LES NORWOOD, P laintiff, 0 9 - c v - 7 3 8 -b b c v. M IK E THURMER, DON STRAHOTA, C.O. BEAHM, C .O . WOODS, C.O. TRITT, C.O. GORSKE, C A PT . O'DONOVAN, LT. BRAEMER, DR. ANKARLO, C.O. RUSSELL and JANE / JOHN DOES, Defendants. --------------------------------------------0 8 - c v - 4 4 6 -b b c 2 Plaintiff Charles Norwood has filed a motion to modify payment of his filing fees to exempt 80% of the gift money he receives in his inmate account from garnishment under 28 U .S .C . 1915(b)(2). Plaintiff requests that the court only take 20% of the gift funds received from his family and friends so that he can purchase personal care items. Because he has five cases, the institution is taking 20% of his income for each case for a total of 100% of his income. The amount owed increases for each case filed. Newlin v. H elm an, 123 F.3d 429, 436 (7th Cir. 1997), rev'd on other grounds by Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025 (7th Cir. 2000) and Walker v. O'Brien, 216 F.3d 626 (7th Cir. 2000). Therefore, plaintiff is currently required to pay 100% of his monthly income until the remaining balances for each of his cases are paid in full. Th e statute governing the collection of fees in his case, 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(2) does no t permit me to exempt any part of the plaintiff's income from withholding. Moreover, in Lucien v. DeTella, 141 F.3d 773, 776 (7th Cir. 1998), the Court of Appeals for the Seventh C ircuit ruled expressly that the word "income" in 1915(b)(2) means more than "earned i n c o m e ." Congress did not define the term "income" in 1915(b), but it used several related terms: "income," "deposits," and "amount in the account." These seem to be used as synonyms, which implies that "income" means "all deposits." A prisoner therefore "shall forward 20% of whatever sums enter a prison trust account, disregarding the source. That some receipts are gifts or bequests from fam ily members does not shelter them from 1915(b)(2), as the prison seems to have supposed. 3 Because the law is settled in this circuit that gift money is not to be excluded from the definition of "income" an inmate might receive, I have no discretion to grant plaintiff's request for an order exempting 80% of his gift money from collection to pay the filing fees he incurred in these cases. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to modify payment of his filing fees is D E N IE D . Entered this 3d day of September, 2010. B Y THE COURT: /s / B A R BA R A B. CRABB D istrict Judge 4

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?