From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Solomon v. Keefe Commissary Network, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION
Jul 26, 2012
CASE NO. 5:12-cv-235-RS-GRJ (N.D. Fla. Jul. 26, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO. 5:12-cv-235-RS-GRJ

07-26-2012

SHERMAN SOLOMON and JAMES H. LEWIS, Plaintiffs, v. KEEFE COMMISSARY NETWORK, LLC, Defendant.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Sherman Act claim was initiated by two inmates, both of whom are housed at the Apalachee Correctional Institution in Sneads, Florida. (Doc. 1.) Only one plaintiff, Mr. Solomon, has sought leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee or security therefor pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) by filing a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2.) The plaintiffs have also filed a motion to proceed as a class action and a motion for appointment of class counsel. (Docs. 3, 4.)

The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("PLRA") requires that a prisoner bringing a civil action in forma pauperis pay the full filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). The law in the Eleventh Circuit expressly prohibits prisoners seeking to proceed in forma pauperis from joining together as plaintiffs in a single law suit. Hubbard v. Haley, 262 F.3d 1194 (11th Cir. 2001). Each prisoner is required to file his own lawsuit and pay the full amount of the filing fee. This applies whether "such association of plaintiffs is construed as governed by the joinder provisions of Rule 20 or the class action provisions of Rule 23, as the effect of either aggregation of plaintiffs [violates] the filing fee requirement of the Prison Litigation Reform Act as expressed in Hubbard." Garcia v McNeil, no. 4:07-cv-474-SPM/WCS, 2010 WL 4818067 *1 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 22, 2010)(C.J. Mickle). As the Eleventh Circuit noted in Hubbard, requiring each plaintiff to pay the full filing fee is consistent with Congress' purpose of imposing costs on prisoners to deter frivolous suits. Id. at 1197-98. If, as in this case, multiple plaintiffs seek to file a joint complaint, dismissal without prejudice to refiling the claims in separate lawsuits is appropriate. Id.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

(1) That the complaint, Doc. 1, be dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiffs' right to proceed in separate lawsuits.
(2) That the Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, Doc. 2, be denied as moot.
(3) That the Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed as a Class Action, Doc. 3, be denied as moot.
(4) That the Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Class Counsel, Doc. 4, be denied as moot.

IN CHAMBERS this 26th day of July 2012.

______________________

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.


Summaries of

Solomon v. Keefe Commissary Network, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION
Jul 26, 2012
CASE NO. 5:12-cv-235-RS-GRJ (N.D. Fla. Jul. 26, 2012)
Case details for

Solomon v. Keefe Commissary Network, LLC

Case Details

Full title:SHERMAN SOLOMON and JAMES H. LEWIS, Plaintiffs, v. KEEFE COMMISSARY…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION

Date published: Jul 26, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 5:12-cv-235-RS-GRJ (N.D. Fla. Jul. 26, 2012)