From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Judd v. Federal Election Commission

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Feb 20, 2009
311 F. App'x 730 (5th Cir. 2009)

Summary

rejecting Judd's application to proceed in forma pauperis because he had three strikes

Summary of this case from JUDD v. STATE

Opinion

No. 07-41033 Summary Calendar.

February 20, 2009.

Keith Russell Judd, Beaumont, TX, pro se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, USDC No. 1:07-CV-637.

Before SMITH, STEWART, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.


Keith Russell Judd, federal prisoner # 11593-051, filed a civil complaint, on September 19, 2007, against the Federal Election Commission and others alleging that he was a candidate for President of the United States and that, as a prisoner, he was not allowed to vote for himself. Judd moved for leave to file the complaint in forma pauperis (IFP). The district court dismissed the IFP complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because Judd had three strikes for filing frivolous pleadings and appeals.

Judd appeals the dismissal of his complaint. He argues that his complaint should have been allowed notwithstanding his prior frivolous pleadings because he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury from an untreated hernia and prison gang members. It is true that Section 1915(g) allows for an exception to the three-strike rule if the prisoner complaint alleges that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Although it may be true that Judd is now under such a threat both from his medical condition and fellow prisoners, neither of those threats is related to his complaint.

Judd also asserts that the dismissal without prejudice was in error because he subsequently sent in forms to pay the filing fee. Again, this may be true, but it has nothing to do with the dismissal without prejudice as such a dismissal would not have prevented him from filing a new suit raising the same factual allegations and paying the filing fee.

The appeal is without arguable merit. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). It is dismissed as frivolous. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Judd has a history of vexatious and frivolous litigation in this court and many other courts. We have issued repeated warnings to Judd, and we have sanctioned him for prior frivolous actions. These earlier warnings and sanctions have been insufficient to deter him from continuing to file frivolous pleadings.

Accordingly, Judd is ORDERED to pay a sanction in the amount of $500 to the clerk of this court. Even after satisfaction of all sanction orders, Judd may not file any civil action in a district court of this circuit, or any pleading or notice of appeal with this court, without first obtaining leave of the court in which he seeks to file such action, pleading, or notice. When seeking leave of court, Judd must certify that the claim he wishes to present is a new one that has never before either been raised and disposed of on the merits or remains pending in any federal court. Upon failure thus to certify or upon false certification, Judd may be found in contempt of court and punished accordingly.

Judd is CAUTIONED that filing any frivolous or repetitive action, in this court or any court subject to this court's jurisdiction, will subject him to additional and progressively more severe sanctions.

ALL OUTSTANDING MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION IMPOSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.


Summaries of

Judd v. Federal Election Commission

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Feb 20, 2009
311 F. App'x 730 (5th Cir. 2009)

rejecting Judd's application to proceed in forma pauperis because he had three strikes

Summary of this case from JUDD v. STATE

In Judd v. Federal Elections Commission, 311 Fed.Appx. 730, 2009 WL 423966 (5th Cir., February 20, 2009), the prisoner argued that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury from a hernia and from prison gang members as an exception for 28 U.S.C. §1915(g); the Fifth Circuit rejected this assertion, stating that "although it may be true that Judd is now under such a threat both from his medical condition and fellow prisoners, neither of those threats is related to his complaint."

Summary of this case from McClure v. Livingston

In Judd v. Fed. Election Comm'n, 311 Fed. Appx. 730, 731 (5th Cir. 2009) (unpublished order), the Fifth Circuit addressed a similar disconnect between the relief sought in the complaint and the allegations of imminent harm.

Summary of this case from Beeson v. Copsey

In Judd v. Federal Election Commission, 311 Fed.Appx. 730, 2009 WL 423966 (5th Cir., February 20, 2009), Judd argued that he was a candidate for President of the United States, but that as a prisoner, he could not vote for himself. He argued that he was entitled to the imminent danger exception because of his hernia and threats from prison gang members, but the Fifth Circuit stated that "although it may be true that Judd is now under such a threat both from his medical condition and fellow prisoners, neither of those threats is related to his complaint."

Summary of this case from Judd v. United States
Case details for

Judd v. Federal Election Commission

Case Details

Full title:Keith Russell JUDD, Plaintiff-Appellant v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Feb 20, 2009

Citations

311 F. App'x 730 (5th Cir. 2009)

Citing Cases

Emmett v. Murray

This imminent danger must relate to the allegations of the complaint. Judd v. Federal Elections Commission, …

Williams v. Perryman

This imminent danger must relate to the allegations of the complaint. Judd v. Federal Elections Commission, …