United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on the motion of plaintiff Willie
Cox, a/k/a Abbue-Jah, for leave to commence this civil action
without prepayment of the required filing fee. (Docket No.
2). For the reasons discussed below, the motion will be
denied, and this case will be dismissed.
Standard on Initial Review
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court is required to
closely screen cases where, as here, there is an application
to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court may deny a litigant
leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss an action if
it determines that the complaint is frivolous or malicious. A
complaint is frivolous “where it lacks an arguable
basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). A complaint is
malicious if it was filed for the purpose of harassing the
named defendant and not for the purpose of vindicating a
cognizable right. Spencer v. Rhodes, 656 F.Supp.
458, 461-63 (E.D. N.C. 1987), aff'd 826 F.2d
1061 (4th Cir. 1987).
considering whether a complaint is malicious, the Court may
refer to objective factors such as the circumstances
surrounding the filing and the nature of the allegations.
Id. Additionally, the Eighth Circuit has recognized
that “malicious” applies to situations where the
complaint is “plainly part of a longstanding pattern of
abusive and repetitious lawsuits.” Horsey v.
Asher, 741 F.2d 209, 213 (8th Cir. 1984); and Cooper
v. Wood, 111 F.3d 135 (8th Cir. 1997) (unpublished).
See also In re McDonald, 489 U.S. 180 (1989) (leave
to proceed in forma pauperis can be denied based in part on
prior abusive litigation).
instant case is one of many interrelated civil rights actions
that plaintiff has filed pro se and in forma pauperis in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri since September 17, 2019. As of the date of this
order, all of plaintiff's cases that have been reviewed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) have been
dismissed for one of the reasons set forth in the statute.
Cox v. City of Clayton, 4:19-cv-03091-RLW, the
Honorable Ronnie L. White determined that plaintiff's
repeated filing of frivolous and interrelated lawsuits
amounted to abuse of the judicial process. Plaintiff was
cautioned that restrictions may be imposed on him if he
continued the practice. On November 22, 2019, plaintiff began
filing lawsuits seeking damages against the District Judges
of this Court who dismissed his cases.
is a pro se litigant who brings this civil action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983. He names Judge John A. Ross as the
sole defendant. (Docket No. 1 at 2). The complaint is on a
Court-provided form, and includes a 43-page attachment
consisting of various documents.
“Statement of Claim” section in the form
complaint contains only the notation: “See
attached.” (Docket No. 1 at 5). The first page of the
attachment contains the following assertion:
Mr. John A. Ross is “deemed” to know the law.
THIS IS THE LAW, HIGHLIGHTED FOR YOUR VIEWING PLEASURE.
Making decisions concerning complaints from citizens without
knowing the law and dismissing the citizen's complaint is
a clear ...