Anthony Gay v. Rakesh Chandra, 682 F.3d 590

Gay, an Illinois inmate with a long history of unsuccessful civil rights suits, sues three prison mental health professionals for allegedly inadequate treatment and retaliation.
Gay has a extensive federal filing history and is indigent; paroled only in 2095.
The district court ordered Gay to post a $1,000 bond to cover expected costs if he lost, despite knowing he could not pay.
The bond was ordered without evaluating the merits of Gay’s claims or his ability to pay, and Gay did not post it.
The court dismissed the case with prejudice for failure to post the bond, addressing past debts but not the merits.
On appeal, the Seventh Circuit reverses the bond order and remands, recognizing alternative tools to address frivolous litigation and emphasizing indigence must be considered.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May a court require a cost bond before suit proceeds when the plaintiff is indigent?	Gay argues bond is impermissible given indigence and access to courts.	Defendants contend bond is a tool to assure cost recovery and deter frivolous suits.	No; bond cannot be imposed if the court knows the plaintiff cannot afford it.
Must a court consider a party’s ability to pay before imposing a cost bond?	Gay asserts indigence requires consideration of ability to pay before bond.	Defendants rely on inherent authority to secure costs, citing past cases.	Indigence must be considered; abuse occurs when bond is imposed despite inability to pay.
Is dismissal with prejudice for failure to post a cost bond appropriate when the bond is unaffordable?	Gay contends dismissal for nonpayment of an unaffordable bond blocks access to court.	Defendants argue dismissal is permissible as a sanction for nonpayment.	Dismissal under these circumstances is improper when the bond amount is unaffordable.

Aggarwal v. Ponce School of Medicine, 745 F.2d 723 (1st Cir. 1984) (weighs factors for imposing cost bonds to avoid denying access)
Murphy v. Ginorio, 989 F.2d 566 (1st Cir. 1993) (requirement to consider plaintiff's finances before bond)
Anderson v. Steers, Sullivan, McNamar & Rogers, 998 F.2d 495 (7th Cir. 1993) (inherent power to award costs implies bond; consider payability)
Simulnet East Assocs. v. Ramada Hotel Operating Co., 37 F.3d 573 (9th Cir. 1994) (protect against depriving access when bond imposed on indigent)
Selletti v. Carey, 173 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 1999) (consideration of plaintiff's finances before sanctions or bonds)