SIMPKINS
v.
WISSINGER
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.
Plaintiff Simpkins, a prisoner, filed a civil rights complaint under § 1983 in forma pauperis. The district court dismissed the case because Simpkins had three or more prior federal civil actions dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim, triggering the Prison Litigation Reform Act's filing fee requirement under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The dismissal was without prejudice, allowing Simpkins to refile upon payment of the full filing fee.
A prisoner with three or more prior dismissals on the grounds specified in § 1915(g) cannot proceed in forma pauperis and must pay the full filing fee at the time the lawsuit is initiated, unless the prisoner alleges he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Simpkins did not make such an allegation, so dismissal was proper.
[1] A prisoner who has had three or more prior actions or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim is prohibited from proceeding in forma pauper…
[2] A prisoner subject to the "three strikes" rule under 28 U.S.C. …
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil rights action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.”
This is the statutory language of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which establishes the three-strike rule for in forma pauperis proceedings by prisoners.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLeonardo Simpkins, a prisoner, filed a civil rights complaint naming Officer Wissinger, Mr. McCathertan, Edward Scott, and Michael Johnson as defendan…
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 Imminent Danger Exception cases and more on FLexlaw
and MICHAEL JOHNSON, Defendants. Case No: 5:24-cv-164-WFJ-PRL
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff Leonardo Simpkins's Civil Rights Complaint (Doc. 1) filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case is due to be dismissed because the Plaintiff is prohibited from proceeding in forma pauperis, per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and did not pay the filing fee at the time he initiated this case.
Section 1915(g) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act states:
(g) In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil rights action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) Thus, if a prisoner has had three or more civil actions or appeals dismissed for one of the recited reasons, he cannot proceed in forma pauperis and must pay the filing fee in full at the time the lawsuit is initiated. Dupree v. Palmer, 284 F. 3d 1234, 1236 (11th Cir. 2002). Consequently, courts have a responsibility to dismiss cases, even sua sponte, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See, e.g., Casey v. Scott, 493 F. App’x 1000, 1001 (11th Cir. 2012).
The Court takes judicial notice of Plaintiff's recent federal civil actions that were dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g): (1) Simpkins v. Wissinger, et al., No. 5:23-cv-630-SPC- PRL (M.D. Fla.); (2) Simpkins v. Wissinger, et al., No. 5:23-cv-604-SPC-PRL (M.D. Fla.); (3) Simpkins v. Wissinger, et al., No. 5:23-cv-85-TPB-PRL (M.D. Fla.); (4) Simpkins v. Brandon, et al., No. 3:17-cv-1385-HLA-MCR (M.D. Fla.).
Based upon the prior dismissals and Plaintiff's failure to allege that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury, he is required to pay the filing fee at the time the lawsuit is initiated, and the case will be dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff may initiate a new civil rights action by filing a new civil rights complaint form together with the full filing fee.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
1. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
2. The Clerk is directed close the case.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on April 4, 2024.
WILLIAM F. JUNG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to: Pro Se Party