From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brodsky v. Mandura

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Nov 26, 2013
Case No. 2:13-cv-02160-GMN-GWF (D. Nev. Nov. 26, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 2:13-cv-02160-GMN-GWF

11-26-2013

JOSHUA D. BRODSKY, Plaintiff, v. DR. MANDURA, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

This action is a pro se civil rights complaint filed by an inmate. Plaintiff has submitted a complaint and seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 1). This matter has not been properly commenced because plaintiff submitted incomplete financial paperwork. The in forma pauperis application was not submitted on the court-approved form as required by Local Rule LSR 1-1. In addition to filing an application to proceed in forma pauperis on the court-approved form, a prisoner seeking to proceed in forma pauperis "shall submit a certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint . . . obtained from the appropriate official of each prison at which the prisoner is or was confined." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), (2); Local Rule LSR 1-2. Plaintiff has failed to submit an in forma pauperis application on the court-approved form and has failed to provide the necessary financial information.

It does not appear from the papers presented that a dismissal without prejudice would result in a promptly-filed new complaint being untimely. In this regard, plaintiff at all times remains responsible for calculating the running of the limitations period as applied to this matter and properly commencing a timely-filed civil rights action.

Section 1983 does not contain a specific statute of limitations. Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 266 (1985); Vaughan v. Grijalva, 927 F.2d 476, 478 (9th Cir. 1991). The Supreme Court has determined the appropriate statute of limitations for all § 1983 claims, regardless of the facts or legal theory of the particular case, is the forum state's statute of limitations for personal injury actions. Perez v. Seevers, 869 F.2d 425, 426 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 860 (1989). The statute of limitations in Nevada for personal injuries is two years. See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.190(4)(e).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the application (ECF No. 1) to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED and that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the filing of a new complaint in a new action with a properly completed in forma pauperis application with complete financial attachments in compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff the following: (1) two copies of an in forma pauperis application form for a prisoner and instructions for same; (2) two copies of a blank 42 U.S.C. § 1983 prisoner civil rights form and instructions for the same; and (3) one copy of the papers submitted by plaintiff at ECF No. 1 & 1-1.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff may file a new complaint and new in forma pauperis application in a new action, but he may not file further documents in this action.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this court CERTIFIES that any in forma pauperis appeal from this order would not be taken "in good faith" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

____________________________

Gloria M. Navarro

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Brodsky v. Mandura

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Nov 26, 2013
Case No. 2:13-cv-02160-GMN-GWF (D. Nev. Nov. 26, 2013)
Case details for

Brodsky v. Mandura

Case Details

Full title:JOSHUA D. BRODSKY, Plaintiff, v. DR. MANDURA, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Nov 26, 2013

Citations

Case No. 2:13-cv-02160-GMN-GWF (D. Nev. Nov. 26, 2013)