Opinion
13-CV-6784(JS)(WDW)
12-17-2013
CRAIG BURROUGHS, EDDIE MURDOCK, GARY WALSH, JEROME KOWALSKI, KEITH ADDISON, MICHAEL DOLLISON, RAMEL NELLUMS, DANIEL MILLER, LEO DUCHNOWSKI, CRAIG THURSTON, WILLIAM COWAN, KURTIS PHILLIP, JAMES SUTHERLAND, JAMEL WILLIAMS, KEVIN FARRELLY, Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF NASSAU, MICHAEL SPOSATO, Sheriff of Nassau County, Defendants.
APPEARANCES For Plaintiffs: Craig Burroughs, #13005758, pro se Eddie Murdock, #13003401, pro se Gary Walsh, #13003699, pro se Jerome Kowalski, #13004867, pro se Keith Addison, #13004867, pro se Michael Dollison, #12009667, pro se Ramel Nellums, #13007957, pro se Daniel Miller, #12003565, pro se Leo Duchnowski, #13004975, pro se Craig Thurston, #13003524, pro se William Cowan, #13006769, pro se Kurtis Phillip, #13003851, pro se James Sutherland, #13005724, pro se Jamel Williams, #13007156, pro se Kevin Farrelly, #13004238, pro se Nassau County Correctional Center For Defendants: No appearances.
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
APPEARANCES
For Plaintiffs:
Craig Burroughs, #13005758, pro se
Eddie Murdock, #13003401, pro se
Gary Walsh, #13003699, pro se
Jerome Kowalski, #13004867, pro se
Keith Addison, #13004867, pro se
Michael Dollison, #12009667, pro se
Ramel Nellums, #13007957, pro se
Daniel Miller, #12003565, pro se
Leo Duchnowski, #13004975, pro se
Craig Thurston, #13003524, pro se
William Cowan, #13006769, pro se
Kurtis Phillip, #13003851, pro se
James Sutherland, #13005724, pro se
Jamel Williams, #13007156, pro se
Kevin Farrelly, #13004238, pro se
Nassau County Correctional Center For Defendants: No appearances. SEYBERT, District Judge:
On November 18, 2013, plaintiffs, a group fifteen incarcerated pro se plaintiffs (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), filed a civil rights Complaint in this Court accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis for each Plaintiff with the exception of Plaintiff Daniel Miller. The Complaint is accompanied by a Motion for Preliminary Injunction, a request for an Order to Show Cause, and a Motion to Appoint a Plaintiff as the Representative Party to Sign Motions on Behalf of all Plaintiffs. (Docket Entries 17, 18.)
Given Miller's long history of frivolous litigation, the Court barred him from filing in forma pauperis complaints under the Prison Litigation Reform Act's "Three Strikes" provision. See Miller v. Cnty. of Nassau, No. 12-CV-4159, 2012 WL 4370125 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 21, 2012); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Miller is no stranger to this Court. Since 2000, Miller has filed twenty in forma pauperis civil actions, almost all of which have been dismissed: Miller v. United States, No. 00-CV-3088(CBA) (E.D.N.Y. 2001) (withdrawn); Miller v. Cnty. of Nassau, No. 00-CV-6124(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2001) (dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted); Crosby v. Walsh, No. 03-CV-4897(ARR) (E.D.N.Y. 2005) (dismissed in forma pauperis complaint filed by four inmates, including Miller, for failure to state a claim); Miller v. Reilly, No. 05-CV-0611(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2005) (settled); Miller v. Cnty. of Nassau, 467 F. Supp. 2d 308 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) (dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted); Miller v. Reilly, No. 06-CV-3727(ADS) (E.D.N.Y. 2008) (settled); Miller v. Reily, No. 06-CV-6485(JS) (E.D.N.Y. 2007) (withdrawn); Miller v. Zerillo, No. 07-CV-1687(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2009) (dismissed as moot and unexhausted under the PLRA); Miller v. Zerillo, No. 07-CV-1719(JS) (E.D.N.Y. 2008) (dismissed as moot and unexhausted under the PLRA); Miller v. Lindsay, No. 07-CV-2556(JS) (E.D.N.Y. 2009) (dismissed as moot); Miller v. Alexander, No. 07-CV-3533(JS) (E.D.N.Y. 2008) (dismissed as moot); Miller v. Reilly, No. 08-CV-1863(TCP) (E.D.N.Y. 2009) (dismissed as unexhausted and moot); In re Daniel Miller, No. 12-MC-0512(JBW) (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (case closed by Order dated August 6, 2012 and Plaintiff's submission concerning "Terrorist Acts" was forwarded to the U.S. Marshal); Miller v. Spizatto, No. 12-CV-2511(JS) (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (dismissed unexhausted 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition claiming excessive bail); Miller v. Cnty. of Nassau, No. 12-CV-4164(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2013) (dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee); Miller v. Smith, No. 12-CV-4378(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (same); Miller v. Cnty. of Nassau, No. 12-CV-44 66(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (same); Miller v. Cnty. of Nassau, No. 12-CV-4430(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (same); Miller v. Cnty. of Nassau, No. 12-CV-454 9(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (same); and Miller v. Cnty. of Nassau, No. 12-CV-4550(JS)(WDW) (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (same).
Upon review of Plaintiffs' declarations in support of their respective applications to proceed in forma pauperis (other than Miller), the Court finds that each Plaintiff's financial status qualifies him to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Accordingly, Plaintiffs' applications to proceed in forma pauperis are GRANTED.
Miller paid his pro rata share of the filing fee on December 9, 2013.
--------
In addition, because Plaintiffs are proceeding pro se, they cannot represent anyone other than themselves. Miller, 2012 WL 4370125, at *1 (citing Moore v. T-Mobile USA, No. 10-CV-0527, 2011 WL 609818, at *6 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 15, 2011)). Accordingly, Plaintiffs' request to appoint a representative to sign papers filed with the Court is DENIED.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' applications to proceed in forma pauperis are GRANTED and Plaintiffs' Motion to Appoint a Plaintiff as the Representative Party to Sign Motions on Behalf of All Plaintiffs is DENIED. The Court ORDERS expedited personal service of the Summonses, the Complaint, the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, the request for an Order to Show Cause, and this Order by the United States Marshal Service without prepayment of the filing fee.
SO ORDERED.
________________
Joanna Seybert, U.S.D.J.
Dated: December 17 , 2013
Central Islip, NY