McKee v. Wayne County Sheriffs
2:24-cv-13370
E.D. Mich.Apr 14, 2025Background
- Martez Dwight McKee, a state inmate at Wayne County Jail, filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- McKee sought to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) but could not obtain a certified jail trust account statement due to alleged noncooperation by jail officials.
- He filed various motions, including for a permanent restraining order citing physical assault and denial of access to courts, and for the service of his complaint.
- The Court considered whether McKee's efforts to obtain financial records sufficed to allow IFP status and whether his other motions were ripe.
- The decision addressed financial procedure under the Prison Litigation Reform Act and whether McKee’s filings support immediate injunctive relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grant IFP status without full financial docs | McKee made diligent attempts to get statement | Jail did not provide statement | Granted, finding efforts sufficient for IFP status |
| Require jail to set aside filing fee funds | Jail should set aside 20% of future deposits | — | Granted; jail to deduct 20% per statutory procedure |
| Permanent restraining order/injunctive relief | Alleged assault & denial of court access | — | Denied without prejudice; allegations not in complaint |
| Motions to compel records and grievances | Needs documents for IFP & case support | — | Denied as moot after IFP status granted |
| Service of complaint by Marshals | Requests marshals serve complaint | — | Granted; must submit needed documents for service |
Key Cases Cited
- Phipps v. King, 866 F.2d 824 (6th Cir. 1988) (district court has discretion to grant or deny IFP applications)
- Blackwell v. Nocerini, 123 F.4th 479 (6th Cir. 2024) (court generally limited to facts in the complaint when considering relief)