Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sanders v. Dirt

United States District Court, Seventh Circuit

August 23, 2013

MARIO TERRELL SANDERS #R-30846, Plaintiff,
v.
THOMAS DIRT, SHERIFF, Defendant.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

MILTON I. SHADUR, Senior District Judge.

This Court's May 16, 2013 memorandum order ("Order I") addressed the then-newly-filed pro se Complaint brought by Mario Terrell Sanders ("Sanders"), in which he sought to invoke 42 U.S.C. §1983 ("Section 1983") to obtain damages from Cook County Sheriff Thomas Dart (misspelled by Sanders as "Dirt"). Because the In Forma Pauperis Application ("Application") that accompanied the Complaint failed to include the trust fund account information called for by 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(2), [1] Order I ordered Sanders to provide that input. When Sanders then complied with that request, his submission reflected the unusual situation in which the average monthly balance in his account (see Section 1915(b)(1)(B)) had exceeded the average monthly deposits to the account (see Section 1915(b)(1)(A)). Indeed the average daily balance for the relevant period was $910.90, so that the initial partial filing fee payment required under Section 1915(b)(1) came to $182.18.

More importantly, however, that large daily balance would have been much more than enough to pay the $350 filing fee up front, while still leaving a substantial balance remaining in the account. That being so, this Court's May 29, 2013 memorandum order ("Order II") denied the Application that had sought in forma pauperis ("IFP") treatment.

What then happened is that Sanders wrote a letter (Dkt. 10, received in the Clerk's Office on June 17) that explained he had been "saving up for my children Christmass [sic]" and had then sent the accumulated amount to his mother after the expiration of the relevant six-month period specified in Section 1915(a)(2). When Sanders' letter then asked for a waiver of payment (an alternative unavailable to this Court under the provisions of Section 1915) or for "a period of time to try to come up with the money, " this Court saw no problem with the latter alternative.

Since then, however, Sanders has neither provided any funds at all nor indicated any specific proposal for payment (note once again that the manner in which Section 1915 is framed makes the trust fund account information during the six-month period preceding the filing of the lawsuit the determinative factor as to a prisoner's qualification for the special type if IFP status available under Section 1915). Under the circumstances, this Court denies the pending Motion for Attorney Representation (Dkt. 7), without prejudice to its possible renewal as and when Sanders pays the filing fee.

In the meantime Sanders will be allowed another four months (until December 23, 2013) within which to pay the $350 filing fee (in which event the effective filing date for limitations and other purposes will continue to be Sanders' original May 2013 submission date of his Complaint). Failing such timely payment, both the Complaint and this action will be dismissed.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.