Legal Opinion
Thomas Richey v. D. Dahne
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 8, 2015No. 12-36045PublishedCited by 239 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GOULD, Circuit Judge:
Thomas W.S. Richey appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights action for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). A motions panel granted Richey’s motion for in forma pauperis (IFP) status on appeal. Dahne later filed a motion to revoke Richey’s IFP status under the “three strikes” provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Dahne’s motion raises the question whether a prisoner may maintain IFP status when appealing the dismissal of his third-strike lawsuit, an issue left open by…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Jones v. BockSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Porter v. NussleSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Juan Albino v. Lee BacaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by239 opinions
- Adonai El-Shaddai v. Jeffrey Wang, MdCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Marc Hall v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2022
- Jorge Rico v. Clark DucartCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- Parker v. Montgomery County Correctional FacilityCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
- Artrai Alexander v. TDCJCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2020
234 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.