LEON BRIGHT
v.
CITY OF TAMPA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A pro se litigant is not entitled to free copies of court documents beyond those already provided by the Clerk's office, even when proceeding in forma pauperis.
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a § 1983 action and subsequently appealed the dismissal of his Fourth Amended Complaint. He then moved for free co…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse In Forma Pauperis cases and more on FLexlaw
I deny Plaintiff's requests for free copies of certain documents that he filed, and other documents previously mailed to him by the Clerk's Office (Docs. 56, 59, 61, 62). Plaintiff is directed to pay the Clerk of Court for any copies he requests.
Plaintiff, who is proceeding without a lawyer, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after a January 2018 incident in which he claims he was harassed by a public bus driver, wrongfully detained by the police, and falsely charged with trespassing. Compl. (Doc. 1). The Court afforded Plaintiff the opportunity to amend his Complaint several times (Docs. 15, 29, 36), but ultimately denied Plaintiff's motion to proceed without pre-paying the filing fee and dismissed Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint for failure to comply
with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Docs. 50, 51). Plaintiff appealed that decision (Doc. 57).
While copies of all relevant documents have already been transmitted to the Eleventh Circuit (see Doc. 60), Plaintiff moves for free personal copies of certain documents previously filed with the Court, to assist him in prosecuting his appeal. See Docs. 56 (requesting copy of Fourth Amended Complaint), 59 (requesting copy of Fourth Amended Complaint), 61 (requesting copy of Third and Fourth Amended Complaint), 62 (requesting copy of Motion for Extension (Doc. 47), Order Granting Motion for Extension (Doc. 48), Report and Recommendations (Doc. 50), Order on Report and Recommendations (Doc. 51), Motion for Leave to Amend and to Vacate (Doc. 52)).
Although Plaintiff is proceeding without a lawyer, he is not entitled to more free copies of documents filed in this case, beyond those already provided by the Clerk's office. Jackson v. Fla. Dep't of Fin. Servs., 479 F. App’x 289, 292- 293 (11th Cir. 2012) (relying on Harless v. United States, 329 F. 2d 397, 398-99 (5th Cir. 1964)) (“The statutory right to proceed in forma pauperis does not include the right to obtain copies of court orders, indictments, and transcript of record, without payment therefor, for use in proposed or prospective litigation."); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1914(b) (prescribing that the Court collect certain fees, including those for copies). It is Plaintiff's responsibility to keep or make duplicate copies of his filings.
The fee associated with reproducing any paper record is $0.50 per page. 28 U.S.C. § 1914 (JUDICIAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULE OF FEES, District Court Miscellaneous Fee Schedule, 4.a.). The Clerk will require the prepayment of fees prior to providing copies of any documents. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(c).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's motions for free copies (Docs. 56, 59, 61, 62) are DENIED. Plaintiff is directed to pay the Clerk of Court for any copies he requires.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, April 4, 2024.
Natalie Hirt Adams
NATALIE HIRT ADAMS
United States Magistrate Judge