Hendon v. Ramsey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The Court must also examine whether requiring Plaintiff to pay 20 percent of his monthly income for each action filed would place an unreasonable burden on his constitutional right of meaningful access to the courts. In Whitfield , the Second Circuit declined to hold that mandatory recoupment of 100 percent of a prisoner’s monthly income would be unconstitutional, but the panel did find that “such recoupment could raise serious concerns.” See 241 F.3d at 277. Similarly, in Lafauci [v. Cunningham, 139 F.Supp.2d 144 (D.Mass.2001) ], the district court found that recoupment of 100 percent of a prisoner’s monthly income would raise serious constitutional concerns because it would leave a prisoner with “no income for postage, copying, paper, envelopes, writing utensils, etc.-potentially leaving him/her without means of court communication.” See 139 F.Supp.2d at 147 . However, the Supreme Court has stated that “[i]t is indisputable that indigent inmates must be provided at state expense with paper and pen to draft legal documents, with notarial services to authenticate them, and with stamps to mail them.” Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 824-25 , 97 S.Ct. 1491 , 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977). Thus, even if 100 percent of Plaintiffs income is recouped for filing fees, he will not be denied access to paper, writing instruments, or postage because the government is required to provide these materials to indigent inmates. Similarly, as noted by the Ninth Circuit, “[bjecause prisoners are in the c”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 374 F. App'x 821 - Christensen v. Big Horn County Board of County Commissioners

2. “Given that the other provisions of § 1915 require a prisoner to submit documents and pay initial filing fees for each civil action or appeal he files, § 1915(b)(2) lends itself to a reading that the 20 percent monthly payments must also be collected for each civil action or appeal filed. In other words, the overall statutory scheme is written in a manner that requires prisoners to com- píete procedures and pay fees on a per case basis, rather than a per prisoner basis. Further, § 1915(b)(2) references “the initial partial filing fee” discussed in § 1915(b)(1), suggesting that the subsections of the statute are intended to be read as an overall statutory scheme. The Court thus FINDS that when read in the context of the entire statute, § 1915(b)(2) mandates that after payment of the initial partial filing fee for each action or appeal filed, prisoners are also required to make monthly payments of 20 percent of their income for each civil action or appeal filed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 374 F. App'x 821 - Christensen v. Big Horn County Board of County Commissioners

3. “[W]e hold that the fees for filing the complaint and appeal cumulate.... The PLRA is designed to require the prisoner to bear some marginal cost for each legal activity.”). District courts in the Sixth and Ninth Circuits have also followed the”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Siluk v. Merwin