Opinion
8:23-cv-2144-CEH-TGW
06-25-2024
BRITTANY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. BABY DOLL'S GENTLEMAN'S CLUB, Defendant.
ORDER
Charlene Edwards Honeywell United States District Judge
Before the Court is Plaintiff's “Motion to Pay” (Doc. 11), which the Court construes as a motion to reconsider the order dismissing this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (see Doc. 3). Plaintiff argues she meets the “imminent-danger” exception to § 1915(g) because she suffers from depression, PTSD, and “schizobipolar.” But Plaintiff's allegation that she suffers from mental illness, without more, is insufficient to meet the “imminent-danger” exception to § 1915(g). See, e.g., Clay v. Martin, 2023 WL 2733387, at *3 (M.D. Ga. Mar. 31, 2023) (“[E]motional or psychological injuries are not physical injuries and therefore cannot satisfy the requirements of § 1915(g).”) (citing Sanders v. Melvin, 873 F.3d 957, 960 (7th Cir. 2017) (prisoner's allegations of “deteriorating mental state” insufficient to satisfy the § 1915(g) exception because “[m]ental deterioration. . .is a psychological rather than a physical problem”); Mathews v. Streeit, 2024 WL 1589499, at *2 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 21, 2024), report and recommendation adopted, 2024 WL 1585932 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 11, 2024) (“The [imminent-danger] exception requires a showing of specific, credible allegations of imminent-danger of serious physical harm.”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, Plaintiff provides no basis for the Court to reconsider the dismissal under § 1915(g).
Plaintiff's “Motion to Pay” (Doc. 11) is therefore DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED