Griffin v. Turner
| Decision Date | 16 July 1968 |
| Docket Number | Misc. No. 1-68—4-68. |
| Citation | 288 F. Supp. 12 |
| Parties | Bobby Lee GRIFFIN v. TURNER. Linell H. JONES v. WILKINSON. Donald L. BEISHIR v. WILKINSON et al. Charles Allen McCLOUD v. ELLIOTT. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri |
Bobby Lee Griffin, Linell H. Jones, Donald L. Beishir, Charles Allen McCloud, pro se.
Norman A. Anderson, Atty. Gen., Howard L. McFadden, Asst. Atty. Gen., State of Mo., Jefferson City, Mo., for defendant.
In each of the above cases, which have been assigned a miscellaneous number, plaintiffs have sought to file Civil Rights actions in forma pauperis against either the Director of the Missouri Department of Corrections or some subordinate employee of that department.
In Cupp v. Swenson, Warden, No. 1120, 288 F.Supp. 1, and the companion cases covered by our memorandum opinion and order entered in those cases, we stated that we would not exercise the discretion vested in this Court by Section 1915, Title 28, United States Code, to permit the commencement of a prisoner Civil Rights action in forma pauperis until and unless a particular plaintiff seeking to file such an action alleges with particularity under a heading entitled "EXHAUSTION OF GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE REMEDY" the steps taken by him to obtain an appropriate administrative review of his complaint or grievance.
Justice requires that the same rule be applied to all comparable cases. We find and determine that the complaints tendered for filing in forma pauperis covered by this memorandum opinion and order are comparable to those covered by our order in Cupp v. Swenson, No. 1120, et al. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the particular complaints be given a miscellaneous number by the Clerk of this Court in order that the files and records of this Court will reflect that this order denying leave to commence an action pursuant to Section 1915, Title 28, United States Code, has been entered in connection with each of the particular complaints captioned above. It is further
ORDERED that a copy of Cupp v. Swenson, supra, be attached to this order and that by this reference the terms and conditions of that order are made applicable to the above captioned complaints. It is further
ORDERED that a copy of each complaint covered by this order be forwarded to the Honorable Howard L. McFadden, the Assistant Attorney General of Missouri, who customarily represents the Missouri Department of Corrections in ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Burns v. Swenson
-
Noble v. Wilkinson, Civ. Misc. No. 5-68.
...as Burns et al. v. Swenson (W.D.Mo.1968), 288 F. Supp. 4; Cupp et al. v. Swenson (W.D. Mo.1968), 288 F.Supp. 1, and Griffin v. Turner et al. (W.D.Mo.1968), 288 F. Supp. 12. Our opinion in those cases took note of the fact that the Missouri Department of Corrections has recently promulgated ......
-
Burns v. Swenson
...or any other court. 1 See also Cupp v. Swenson, W.D.Mo.1968, 288 F.Supp. 1, involving sixteen other related cases, and Griffin v. Turner, W.D. Mo.1968, 288 F.Supp. 12, involving four more related 2 Douglas v. Sigler, 8 Cir. 1967, 386 F.2d 684, was decided before we handed down our earlier o......