discussing the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”)
How later courts described this case
- discussing the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:22-cv-00142-MR
EDDRICCO L. BROWN-BEY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) ORDER
)
)
MECKLENBURG COUNTY HEALTH )
DEPARTMENT-VITAL RECORDS, )
et al., )
)
Defendants. )
________________________________ )
THIS MATTER is before the Court on initial review of Plaintiff’s
Complaint, filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 [Doc. 1], and Plaintiff’s motion to
proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. 2].
I. BACKGROUND
Pro se Plaintiff Eddricco L. Brown-Bey (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner of the
State of North Carolina currently incarcerated at Bertie Correctional
Institution in Windsor, North Carolina. He filed this civil rights action pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 – and many other provisions of law – on April
4, 2022. [Doc. 1]. Plaintiff names Mecklenburg County Health Department-
Vital Records and the State of North Carolina Department of Health and
Human Services-Vital Records as Defendants. [Id.]. Plaintiff has moved to
proceed in this matter in forma pauperis. [Doc. 2]. Briefly, Plaintiff asserts
that his Birth Certificate is fraudulent and subjects him to “denationalization”
and “mental slavery” by identifying him as “Black,” rather than
“Cherokee/Aborigine Moor.” [Doc. 1 at 5-6]. For relief, Plaintiff seeks to be
recognized as a Cherokee/Aborigine Moor, $50,000,000.00 in compensatory
damages, and $10,000,000.00 in punitive damages. [Id. at 21].
II. DISCUSSION
The provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 are mandatory and define the
degree and scope of this Court’s initial review of Plaintiff’s Complaint. See
Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 596 (1998) (discussing the Prison
Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”)). Section 1915(g) of the PLRA provides:
In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or
appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding
under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more
prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any
facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the
United States that was dismissed on the grounds that
it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is
under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Any of the enumerated types of dismissals count as a
strike, “whether [the dismissals are] with prejudice or without.” Lomax v.
Ortiz-Marquez, 140 S.Ct. 1721, 1723 (2020). Plaintiff mistakenly asserts that
“28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) does not apply to [him].” [Doc. 1 at 22].
Plaintiff has filed at least three prior civil actions that count as strikes
under § 1915(g): Brown-Bey v. North Carolina, 5:17-ct-3253-D, 2019 WL
165697 (E.D.N.C. Jan. 9, 2019) (§ 1983 action dismissed for failure to state
a claim); Brown-Bey v. Hooks, 3:18-cv-460-FDW, 2018 WL 4620617
(W.D.N.C. Sept. 26, 2018) (§ 1983 action dismissed as frivolous); Brown-
Bey v. Hooks, 1:18-cv-15-FDW, 2018 WL 576309 (W.D.N.C. Jan. 26, 2018)
(same). See also Brown-Bey v. North Carolina, 3:19-cv-188-FDW, 2019 WL
6717045 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 10, 2019) (§ 1983 action dismissed pursuant to §
1915(g)); Brown-Bey v. N.C. Dep’t of Health and Human Servs., 3:21-cv-
413-MR, 2021 WL 5043987 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 29, 2021) (same); Brown-Bey v.
North Carolina, 1:22-cv-27-MR, 2022 WL 902746 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 28, 2022)
(same).
Plaintiff is, therefore, subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)’s bar to filing civil
actions in forma pauperis unless he can show that he is under imminent
danger of serious physical injury, which he has not done. The Court,
therefore, will dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint.
III. CONCLUSION
In sum, the Complaint will be dismissed as barred by the three-strikes
provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s Application to
Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs is denied, and the
Order for Prisoner Trust Account Statement is vacated as moot.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiffs Complaint [Doc. 1] is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in
District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs [Doc. 2] is DENIED and the
Order for Prisoner Trust Account Statement [Doc. 4] is VACATED as moot.
The Clerk of Court is instructed to add this case to the Plaintiff's Filer
Status Report in CM-ECF and to close this case.
ITIS SO ORDERED. Signed: April 11, 2022
Martifi Reidinger ee
Chief United States District Judge AS