ARTICLE
1 May 2023

Fourth Circuit Rules In Favor Of Pro Bono Client, Holds District Court Cannot Rule Dismissal Of Complaint Constitutes A Strike

JB
Jenner & Block

Contributor

Jenner & Block is a law firm of international reach with more than 500 lawyers in six offices. Our firm has been widely recognized for producing outstanding results in corporate transactions and securing significant litigation victories from the trial level through the United States Supreme Court.
On April 13, Jenner & Block and co-counsel MacArthur Justice Center won a pro bono appeal for client Kevin Pitts in the United States Court of Appeals
United States Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Jenner & Block are most popular:
  • within Insolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring topic(s)

On April 13, Jenner & Block and co-counsel MacArthur Justice Center won a pro bono appeal for client Kevin Pitts in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit which held that the district court lacked authority to "prospectively adjudicate a strike" under the Prison Litigation Reform Act's (PLRA) "three-strikes rule."

The three-strikes rule says that people who are incarcerated can file up to three frivolous lawsuits before they are barred from filing more. "The question here is whether a district court dismissing a prisoner complaint is authorized, at that time, to rule that its dismissal is a "strike" for purposes of future litigation," the opinion said.

In 2020, Kevin filed a civil rights suit that the district court ultimately dismissed because his claims were barred by precedent and because the officials they were against were barred by sovereign and prosecutorial immunity. The lower court then went on to rule that the dismissal of the suit constitutes a strike under PLRA.

Associate Kathryn Wynbrandt, who argued the case in December, convinced the court that the district court lacked the authority to make that call.

"We hold that a district court may not contemporaneously rule that its dismissal of a complaint constitutes a strike," the opinion said.

Partner Ian Heath Gershengorn supervised the case.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More