Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jones v. Louque

United States District Court, Middle District of Louisiana

March 18, 2015

ANTONIUS L. JONES #579275
v.
JEANIEE. LOUQUE

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

SHELLY D. DICK, DISTRICT JUDGE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA.

On September 25, 2014, pro se Plaintiff, Antonius L. Jones, an inmate confined at Louisiana State Penitentiary, Angola, Louisiana, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Jeanie E. Louque in the Western District of Louisiana. Although the approved § 1983 Complaint Form indicated that the Complaint should be filed in the Middle District of Louisiana, prison officials electronically filed the Complaint pursuant to the Procedural Rules for Prisoner Electronic Filing Pilot Project, General Order 2012-01 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. A review of this Court's record showed that, on the same date, prison officials electronically filed an identical Complaint in the Middle District of Louisiana. See, Antonius L. Jones v. Jeanie E. Louque, 14-CV-614-BAJ-RLB, which remains pending on this Court's docket.

On March 12, 2015, the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana transferred this matter to the Middle District of Louisiana pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406.

A federal court may dismiss a claim in forma pauperis "if satisfied that the action is frivolous or malicious."[1] A complaint is frivolous "if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact."[2] Duplicate and repetitive lawsuits are malicious for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(1) and must be dismissed for that reason.[3]

In this case, it is apparent that this duplicate complaint was filed in error and is not malicious for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(1). Nonetheless, when a successive in forma pauperis suit is duplicative, the Court should insure that the Plaintiff obtains "one bite at the litigation apple-but not more.”[4] The Court may either consolidate the two actions or dismiss the instant action without prejudice to the Plaintiff pursuing his other case.[5]

Therefore;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 15-CV-158-SDD-SCR is dismissed without prejudice to the claims raised in 14-CV-614-BAJ-RLB.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.