Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

MARVIN WOODARD, Plaintiff, v. ALAMEDA COUNTY; et al., Defendants.

JUDGMENT

SUSAN ILLSTON, United States District Judge.

This action is dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Marvin Woodard, currently incarcerated at the Santa Rita County Jail, filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and applied to proceed in forma pauperis. He recently sent a letter to the court asking for the case to be dismissed without prejudice. Woodard's request is GRANTED. (Docket #6.) This action is dismissed without prejudice.

Although the court's in forma pauperis application instructions explain the fee payment system for prisoners, Woodard appears to be confused about the system. If an inmate has sufficient funds to pay the $150.00 filing fee, he has to do so when he files the complaint. If the inmate does not have sufficient funds to pay the $150.00 filing fee, he may apply to proceed in forma pauperis. If he is allowed to proceed in forma pauperis, the inmate still owes the full $150.00 filing fee but will not have to pay the full filing fee on the day he files the complaint. Instead, the $150.00 fee will be collected over time as money is deposited into his inmate trust account until the full $150.00 fee is paid to the court. The court will not dismiss the action just because the inmate does not have the full fee on the day he files the complaint; indeed, the point of the in forma pauperis statute is to avoid dismissals based solely on a litigant's lack of funds at the outset of the case. On the other hand, an inmate who has insufficient funds to pay the full filing fee at the time he files the complaint, but who later receives money into his inmate trust account (whether from an inmate job, from an outside source, or otherwise) must pay over part of that money to satisfy his debt to the court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WOODARD v. ALAMEDA COUNTY
(Oct 1, 2002)