Opinion
3:21-cv-00114-KGB-ERE
07-26-2021
GARY LEON WEBSTER ADC #114018, PLAINTIFF v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., DEFENDANTS
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
I. Procedures for Filing Objections
This Recommendation for dismissal has been sent to United States District Judge Kristine G. Baker. Plaintiff may file objections if he disagrees with the findings or conclusions set out in the Recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection.
To be considered, objections must be filed within 14 days. If Plaintiff does not file objections, he risks waiving the right to appeal questions of fact. And, if no objections are filed, Judge Baker can adopt this Recommendation without independently reviewing the record.
II. Discussion
On June 21, 2021, Plaintiff Gary Leon Webster, an Arkansas Division of Correction (ADC) inmate, filed this action without the help of a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 2. Plaintiff's complaint alleges that: (1) legal mail he sent on June 2021 was lost; (2) he received legal mail 30 days after it was post marked May 1, 2021; and (3) two checked he signed were not credited to his account. Doc. 2. Because Plaintiff is a well-established three-striker, he can proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) only if he is currently in imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Ashley v. Dilworth, 147 F.3d 715, 717 (8th Cir. 1998).
The following 19 dismissals constitute “strikes” against Plaintiff for purposes of determining eligibility for IFP status: Webster v. Does, No. 3:19-cv-00059-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Pigg, No. 3:19-cv-00060-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Day Inn Motels, Inc., et al., No. 3:19-cv-00078-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 3:19-cv-00083-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. St. Bernard's Hospital, No. 3:19-cv-00084-KGB (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Brown, No. 3:19-cv-00087-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Tate, et al., No. 3:19-cv-00088-BSM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Sun Newspaper, et al., No. 3:19-cv-00089-KGB (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Rhodes, No. 3:19-cv-00092-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Does, No. 3:19-cv-00093-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. St. Bernard's Hospital, et al., No. 3:19-cv-00094-BSM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Doe., No. 3:19-cv-00098-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Doe., No. 3:19-cv-00110-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Doe, No. 3:19-cv-00111-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Henry, No. 3:19-cv-00112-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Lusby, No. 3:19-cv-00116-KGB (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. City of Jonesboro, No. 3:19-cv-00132-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Miles, No. 3:19-cv-00157-DPM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Flynn, No. 5:19-cv-00140-KGB (E.D. Ark.). In numerous others, Mr. Webster was denied IFP status as a three-striker, or his IFP status was revoked, because he did not meet the imminent-danger exception. See, e, g., Webster v. Boyd, et al., No. 3:20-cv-00060-BSM (E.D. Ark.); Webster v. Honeycutt, No. 3:20-cv-00057-DPM (E.D. Ark.).
On June 23, 2021, the Court entered an Order denying Plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP because he failed to allege sufficient facts to show he was in imminent danger and directing the Plaintiff to pay the $402.00 filing fee within 30 days. Doc. 4. The Court specifically cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to comply would result in dismissal of his claims. Doc. 4.
On June 25, 2021, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint alleging that Defendant Young has received his checks from the IRS but has not deposited them in his account. Doc. 5. On July 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Supplement alleging that after he filed this lawsuit Defendant Young brought him a packet of material he thought was lost and stolen and asked him what he wanted done with it, thereby proving his outgoing mail is compromised. Doc 6.
Plaintiff has failed to plead any facts alleging that he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. To date, Plaintiff has not complied with the Court's June 23, 2021 Order and paid the filing fee, and the time for doing so has passed.
III. Conclusion
The Court recommends Plaintiff Gary Leon Webster's claims be DISMISSED, without prejudice, based on his failure to comply with the Court's June 23, 2021 Order requiring him to pay the filing fee.