Taylor v. Connick et al, No. 2:2013cv05854 - Document 2 (E.D. La. 2013)
Court Description: ORDER & REASONS denying 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Alma L. Chasez on 9/23/2013. (clm, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Taylor v. Connick et al Doc. 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA PERCY M. TAYLOR CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 13-5854 PAUL CONNICK, JR., ET AL. SECTION “F” (5) ORDER AND REASONS The plaintiff, Percy Taylor, is incarcerated in the Elayn Hunt Correctional Center. He submitted this pro se complaint pursuant to Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against numerous individuals involved in his 24th J.D.C. criminal proceedings, alleging conspiracy and a fraudulent scheme in connection with waiver of rights forms. (Rec. Doc. #1, Complaint, p. 5). He seeks monetary compensation and injunctive relief. With his complaint, Taylor filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This is a non-dispositive pretrial matter which was referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72.1E(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, now codified at Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), provides that a prisoner shall not be allowed to bring a civil action pursuant to § 1915 if he has, on three or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed as Dockets.Justia.com frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. Taylor is a frequent litigant in this court. He has submitted numerous pro se and in forma pauperis civil rights complaints in this district while he was incarcerated. The court’s records establish that at least four of Taylor’s prior complaints were dismissed as frivolous and/or for failure to state a claim. Those prior actions include: Taylor v. Yanter, Civil Action No. 96-2367 “F”(5) (E.D. La.); Taylor v. Shane Head, et al., 02-3001 c/w 02-3421 “I”(5) (E.D. La.); Taylor v. J.P.S.O. Narcotics Division, Civil Action No. 03-647 "C"(1) (E.D. La.); Taylor v. Jefferson Parish District Attorney’s Office, Civil Action No. 04-165 “C”(4) (E.D. La.). Plaintiff’s current claims do not involve imminent danger to his physical safety. For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Hello This is a Test New Orleans, Louisiana, this23rd of day September , 2013. ____________________________________ ALMA L. CHASEZ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
