From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Joseph v. Salley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION
Oct 12, 2020
C/A No. 3:20-3332-RMG (D.S.C. Oct. 12, 2020)

Opinion

C/A No. 3:20-3332-RMG

10-12-2020

Marcus Albines Joseph, Plaintiff, v. B. Salley, Solicitor; and Bryan Stirling, Director of S.C.D.C., Defendants.


ORDER AND OPINION

Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (R & R) (Dkt. No. 8) recommending that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 2) be denied and that he be given twenty-one days to pay the filing fee and have the action referred back to the Magistrate Judge, otherwise the action will be dismissed. For the reasons set forth below, the Court adopts the R & R as the order of the Court.

Plaintiff, an incarcerated person proceeding pro se, is a "frequent filer" who has filed at least twenty cases in this Court, three of which have been deemed a strike under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). He therefore cannot proceed in forma pauperis unless he satisfies the exception for "imminent danger of serious physical injury" provided by the three-strikes rule. Id.; Torres v. O'Quinn, 612 F.3d 237, 246 (4th Cir. 2010). Plaintiff's instant complaint does not contain the requisite "specific fact allegations of ongoing serious injury, or of a pattern of misconduct evidencing the likelihood of imminent physical injury" and instead alleges past misconduct unrelated to any imminent danger of serious physical injury. Johnson v. Warner, 200 Fed. App'x 270, 272 (4th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). The Court, therefore, denies the instant motion to proceed in forma pauperis and adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendations.

For the foregoing reasons, the Court ADOPTS the R & R (Dkt. No. 8) as the order of the Court. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 2) is DENIED. Plaintiff is DIRECTED that he may pay the filing fee within twenty-one days of the date of this order, in which case this matter shall be referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further review. If Plaintiff chooses not to pay the filing fee by that time, this matter shall be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Richard Mark Gergel

Richard Mark Gergel

United States District Judge October 12, 2020
Charleston, South Carolina


Summaries of

Joseph v. Salley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION
Oct 12, 2020
C/A No. 3:20-3332-RMG (D.S.C. Oct. 12, 2020)
Case details for

Joseph v. Salley

Case Details

Full title:Marcus Albines Joseph, Plaintiff, v. B. Salley, Solicitor; and Bryan…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION

Date published: Oct 12, 2020

Citations

C/A No. 3:20-3332-RMG (D.S.C. Oct. 12, 2020)