Lomax v. Ortiz-Marquez
Issues
Does a court’s dismissal without prejudice for failure to state a claim count towards a prisoner’s three strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which would ban him from filing future legal complaints without filing fees?
The Supreme Court will decide whether a dismissal without prejudice for failure to state a claim counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Section 1915 contains a “three-strikes rule” holding a prisoner liable for litigation costs incurred when filing a civil lawsuit if the prisoner has had three or more prior civil lawsuits dismissed. Petitioner Arthur J. Lomax argues that a court’s dismissal of a complaint without prejudice does not count towards the three-strikes rule that would ban him from filing future legal complaints without filing fees. Lomax supports this argument by noting that dismissal without prejudice does not fall within the meaning of “dismissal” in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Respondent Christina Ortiz-Marquez asserts that this type of dismissal does count towards the three-strike rule because the statute does not differentiate between dismissal with or without prejudice. The Court’s decision will affect a prisoner’s ability to bring civil actions while incarcerated.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Whether a dismissal without prejudice for failure to state a claim counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g).
Petitioner, Arthur Lomax, is currently a prisoner at Limon Correctional Facility. Lomax v. Ortiz-Marquez at 2. Before being incarcerated at the Limon Facility, Lomax was incarcerated at the Centennial Correctional Facility in Colorado. Id.
Edited by
Additional Resources
- Molly Guptill Manning, Trouble Counting to Three: Circuit Splits and Confusion in Interpreting the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s “Three Strikes Rule,” 28 U.S.C. 1915(g), Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy (2018).
- Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson, ‘Three-Strikes’ Rule for Prisoner Suits Gets SCOTUS Review, Bloomberg Law (Oct. 18, 2019).