Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Wesley v. Lasalle Management

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Alexandria Division

September 25, 2019

SEAN WESLEY (#372598), Plaintiff
v.
LASALLE MANAGEMENT, ET AL., Defendants

          JUDGE DONALD E. WALTER

          MEMORANDUM ORDER

          JOSEPH H.L. PEREZ-MONTES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Before the Court is a Motion for Rule to Show Cause (Doc. 109) filed by pro se Plaintiff Sean Wesley (“Wesley”) (#372598). Wesley is an inmate in the custody of the Louisiana Department of Corrections (“DOC”), incarcerated at the Raymond Laborde Correctional Center. At the time of filing, Wesley was incarcerated at River Correctional Center in Ferriday, Louisiana. In his Complaint (Doc. 1), Wesley alleges that he has been denied medical treatment for Hepatitis C. In this Motion (Doc. 109), Wesley asks that the Court order the DOC to show why it should not be ordered to comply with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

         Because Wesley has not demonstrated that the DOC has failed to comply with § 1915, his Motion for Rule to Show Cause (Doc. 109) is DENIED.

         I. Background

         Wesley alleges he made numerous sick calls for medical treatment due to Hepatitis C. (Doc. 1, p. 3). Wesley claims he was denied medical care by staff at numerous LaSalle Management Company, LLC (“LaSalle Management”) facilities because treatment is too expensive. (Docs. 1, 13, 14). Wesley was also informed that he could not receive treatment until he had been incarcerated for two years. (Doc. 18, p. 2). Wesley states that LaSalle Management simply transferred him between facilities rather than providing him with medical care. (Docs. 1, 13, 14). Wesley allegedly experiences physical and emotional pain as a result of the lack of treatment. (Doc. 1, p. 3).

         Wesley was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 16).

         II. Law and Analysis

         First, Wesley fails to adequately allege that the DOC is not in compliance with § 1915. Wesley simply quotes the statute and asks the Court to have the DOC comply. (Doc. 109).

         In another suit filed by Wesley regarding Hepatitis C treatment-which has been dismissed-Wesley filed a similar Motion for Rule to Show cause in which he provided additional argument. (5:16-cv-1332; Doc. 75). In that Motion, Wesley claimed that the DOC was taking more than 20% of funds above $10.00 in one 30-day period in order to pay the filing fee for Wesley’s appeal in that case. (5:16-cv-1332; Doc. 75).

         In denying Wesley’s motion, the District Judge pointed out that Wesley “misunderstands the IFP procedures in the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”).” (5:16-cv-1332; Doc. 75). As the District Judge noted in denying the motion:

         Under the PLRA:

(b)(1) Notwithstanding subsection (a), if a prisoner brings a civil action or files an appeal in forma pauperis, the prisoner shall be required to pay the full amount of a filing fee. The court shall assess and, when funds exist, collect, as a partial payment of any court fees required by ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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