Adopting in Part and Rejecting in Part the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge
How later courts described this case
- Adopting in Part and Rejecting in Part the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
EDDIE BROWN,
Plaintiff, Case Number 4:24-CV-10352
F. Kay Behm
v. U.S. District Judge
ROACH,
Defendant,
____________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED
WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FEES AND COSTS AND DISMISSING
WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE COMPLAINT
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Eddie Brown’s pro se civil rights
complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is an inmate confined at the
Lakeland Correctional Facility in Coldwater, Michigan. The Court reviewed
Plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs and his prison
trust account statement; the case is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A).
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) provides that “[t]he clerk of each district court shall
require the parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in such court,
whether by original process, removal or otherwise, to pay a filing fee of $350 ....”
See also Owens v. Keeling, 461 F.3d 763, 773 (6th Cir. 2006). Plaintiff failed to
provide the $350.00 filing fee, plus a $ 52.00 administrative fee, when he filed his
complaint. Plaintiff has filed an application to proceed without prepayment of fees
and costs, along with the supporting documentation.
A review of these documents shows that Plaintiff currently has a spendable
account balance in his prison trust account of $ 501.64, which is more than amount
of the fee to file a civil action. (ECF No. 2, PageID. 28, 29, 31).
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A) states:
Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been
paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that:
(A) The allegation of poverty is untrue [;].
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A) requires the dismissal of a case if there is an
incorrect or unsubstantiated claim of poverty made by the plaintiff. See Baxter v.
Rose, 305 F.3d 486, 489 (6th Cir. 2002), abrogated on other grds by Jones v. Bock,
549 U.S. 199 (2007); Jones v. Michigan Dep't of Human Servs., No. 12-14466, 2013
WL 640771, at * 2 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 21, 2013)(Adopting in Part and Rejecting in
Part the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge). The spendable account
balance of $ 501.64 in Plaintiff’s prison trust account indicates that Plaintiff has
sufficient funds to pay the full amount of the filing fee.
When a district court determines that a plaintiff’s allegations of poverty are
untrue, dismissal is required under the mandatory language of 28 U.S.C. § 1915. See
Redd v. Redmon, 215 F.3d 1327 (Table), 2000 WL 658291, at * 1 (6th Cir. May 9,
2000)(“Section 1915(e)(2)(A) requires the district court to dismiss the case if the
court determines that the allegation of poverty is untrue”). The complaint must be
dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A). Woodson v.
United States, 89 Fed. Cl. 640, 647, n. 14 (2009). “Dismissal on this ground is not
discretionary.” Id.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the application to proceed without
prepayment of fees and costs is DENIED and the complaint (ECF No. 1) is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A).
The dismissal is without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a new complaint in a new case
with the $ 350.00 filing fee plus the $ 52.00 administrative fee.
s/F. Kay Behm
F. Kay Behm
U.S. District Judge
Dated: May 14, 2024