United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR. 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v. Wood, 111 F.3d 135 (8th Cir. 1997) (unpublished).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 plaintiffs 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 plaintiffs 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 against
Judge Henry Edward Autrey. The complaint is on a
Court-provided form, and includes a 57-page attachment
consisting of various documents.
"Statement of Claim" section in the form complaint
contains only the notation: "See attached with
highlighted violations." (Docket No. 1 at 5). Within the
attachment, there is a copy of a court order dismissing
plaintiffs case, signed by Judge Autrey. (Docket No. 1-1 at
40-46). Plaintiff has annotated the order by circling or
underlining words and passages, and by adding margin notes.
The marginalia variously accuse the Court of constitutional
violations and fraud.
balance of the attachment includes legal definitions, case
citations, and legal arguments. The upshot of these documents
is plaintiffs apparent belief that he has a right to drive
his vehicle without being subject to state or local
regulations, and that any traffic citation he receives is a
seeks $1.6 million in general damages, $1.6 million in actual