Harper v. Tex. Dept. of Criminal Justice

Full title: DARRELL J. HARPER v. TEX. DEPT. OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION

Date published: May 6, 2015

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14cv666 (E.D. Tex. May. 6, 2015)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14cv666

05-06-2015

DARRELL J. HARPER v. TEX. DEPT. OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

KEITH F. GIBLIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff Darrell J. Harper filed this lawsuit against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. He alleges he is wrongfully imprisoned and seeks $100,000,000 in damages.¹

1 This case was directly assigned to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to this district's General Order 14-10. Plaintiff has provided voluntary written consent to have the assigned magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in this case, including entry of final judgment, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636. The defendant in this action has not been served with process and, as a result, has not appeared. As a result, its consent is not needed for the undersigned to make a final determination in this matter. See Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530, 532 (5th Cir. 1995).

Discussion

Plaintiff has filed more than 50 lawsuits in federal courts within the State of Texas. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has sanctioned plaintiff, stating:

This court previously sanctioned Harper for the filing of frivolous appeals and ordered him to pay $100.00. See Harper v. Atlas, No. 05-20856 (5th Cir. Aug. 28, 2006) (unpublished). Undaunted by the prior sanction, Harper has filed yet another frivolous appeal. We now order Harper to pay $300.00 as a sanction to the clerk of this court. Harper is barred from filing any pleadings in this court

or in any court subject to this court's jurisdiction until the total amount of the sanction imposed on him is paid in full. Harper is also warned that any future meritless filings in this court or in any court subject to this court's jurisdiction will subject him to additional sanctions, as will the failure to withdraw any pending matters that are frivolous.

Harper v. City of Houston, 282 F.App'x 351, 351-52 (5th Cir. 2008).

Plaintiff has not shown that he has satisfied the sanctions imposed in Harper v. City of Houston or in Harper v. Atlas. As a result, this lawsuit will be dismissed without prejudice. An appropriate final judgment shall be entered.

SIGNED this 6 day of May, 2015.

/s/_________

KEITH F. GIBLIN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE