Ready v. Mississippi Department of Corrections ( 2019 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION RODNEY READY, #46987 PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL NO. 1:19-cv-526-LG-RHW MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, MALIKA RUSH, KIMBERLY ECHOLS, JEREMY ST. JULIAN, FALISHA MCCLENDON, AND LYNDO RAMERO DEFENDANTS ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT AS MALICIOUS BEFORE THE COURT is pro se Plaintiff Rodney Ready’s Complaint [1] filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Ready is presently an inmate of the Mississippi Department of Corrections incarcerated at the South Mississippi Correctional Institution in Leakesville, Mississippi. Ready is proceeding in forma pauperis. See Order [7]. The Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (as amended), applies to prisoners proceeding in forma pauperis, and provides that “the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . (B) the action or appeal – (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” Since Ready is a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis, his Complaint is subject to the case-screening procedures set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2). Ready’s Complaint [1] is a duplication of the claims he previously litigated in Ready v. Miss. Dep’t of Corr., no. 1:19-cv-40 (S.D. Miss. May 15, 2019). In the previous case, the Court dismissed Ready’s § 1983 claims with prejudice. Id. Ready admits in his Complaint [1] that he pursued these same claims in his previous case, civil action number 1:19-cv-40. See Compl. [1] at 10 (CM/ECF pagination). “An action may be dismissed as malicious if it duplicates claims raised by the same plaintiff in previous or pending litigation.” Emmett v. Hawthorn, 459 F. App’x 490, 491 (5th Cir. 2012) (citation omitted). A district court has “broad discretion” in dismissing a complaint as malicious. Blakely v. Evans, 574 F. App’x 420, 420 (5th Cir. 2014). Ready’s Complaint [1] is malicious in that it duplicates the allegations presented in Ready v. Miss. Dep’t of Corr., no. 1:19-cv-40 (S.D. Miss. May 15, 2019). Ready is entitled to “one bite at the litigation apple—but not more.” See Pittman v. Moore, 980 F.2d 994, 995 (5th Cir. 1993). IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pro se Plaintiff Rodney Ready’s Complaint [1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as malicious pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(i). SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 3rd day of September, 2019. Louis Guirola, Jr. s/ LOUIS GUIROLA, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2