Summary
In Grimes v. Hill, 15 Colo. 359, the court, p. 365, said: "The defendant, having introduced the testimony concerning the conversation with Williams in support of his side of the issue, was not privileged to deny the materiality of such testimony for the purpose of preventing its contradiction.
Summary of this case from Flaccus Glass Co. v. GavinOpinion
No. C 13-0479 JSW (PR)
03-01-2013
JEROME L. GRIMES, Plaintiff, v. DEPUTY HILL, et al., Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff, an inmate in the San Francisco County Jail and frequent litigator in this Court, has recently filed this pro se civil rights case. On May 18, 2000, this Court informed Plaintiff that under the "three-strikes" provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) he generally is ineligible to proceed in forma pauperis in federal court with civil actions filed while he is incarcerated. See Grimes v. Oakland Police Dept., C 00-1100 CW (Order Dismissing Complaint, 5/18/00). Since then, Plaintiff has continued to file hundreds of civil rights actions seeking in forma pauperis status. With respect to each action filed, the Court conducts a preliminary review to assess the nature of the allegations and to determine whether Plaintiff alleges facts which bring him within the "imminent danger of serious physical injury" exception to § 1915(g). In the past, Plaintiff has routinely been granted leave to amend to pay the full filing fee and to state cognizable claims for relief, but he has habitually failed to do so. For example, in 2003 alone Plaintiff's failure to comply resulted in the dismissal of approximately thirty-six actions under § 1915(g).
In accord with this ongoing practice, the Court has reviewed the allegations in the present action and finds that Plaintiff alleges no facts which bring him within the "imminent danger" clause. The complaint makes a series of nonsensical or inherently impossible allegations, such "9/11/01 terror," "food chain terror in jail and out of jail," and "paramilitary shine flu type poison and super bugs." As has been explained to Plaintiff countless times, such claims are barred. Therefore, it would be futile to grant Plaintiff leave to amend. And even if Plaintiff did amend, he would be required to pay the $350.00 filing fee, which he has never done.
Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice under § 1915(g). The application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. No fee is due. If Plaintiff is so inclined, he may bring his claims in a new action accompanied by the $350.00 filing fee. In any event, the Court will continue to review under § 1915(g) all future actions filed by Plaintiff while he is incarcerated in which he seeks in forma pauperis status.
The Clerk of the Court shall close the files and terminate all pending motions in the cases listed in the caption of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________
JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge
JEROME L GRIMES, Plaintiff,
v. DEPUTY HILL et al, Defendant.
Case Number: CV13-00479 JSW
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on March 1, 2013, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. Jerome L. Grimes
S.F.C.J.
1 Moreland Drive
San Bruno, CA 94066
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk