RESTRICTED - ACCEPT NO FILINGS - Holland v. The City of Gary
2:15-cv-00207
N.D. Ind.Aug 30, 2016Background
- Plaintiff Robert Holland was sanctioned $500 by Judge Rudy Lozano for frivolously challenging the court’s dismissal of all defendants except Med Staff, Inc.
- Holland filed a Notice claiming indigency and inability to pay the $500 sanction, stating his sole income is $1,021/month Social Security disability and that paying would create severe hardship and impede prosecution of his cases.
- The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge John E. Martin for a report and recommendation; an Order to Show Cause was issued and a hearing was held where Holland testified under oath about income, assets, litigation expenses, and job-search efforts.
- Holland testified he owns no real property (though lives rent-free in a former property), has about $20 cash and $20.01 in bank accounts, pays ~$200/month utilities, has paid filing and printing costs for multiple active cases, and expects imminent court fees and copying expenses for other suits.
- The magistrate found Holland’s payment history of filing fees and printing costs undermined his claim of inability to pay and noted he had been explicitly warned that frivolous filings would incur $500 sanctions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Holland is unable to pay the $500 sanction | Holland: indigent; sole income $1,021/month; paying $500 would cause severe hardship and impair prosecution of other cases | Med Staff: court enforcement of sanction; Holland has incurred and paid multiple filing and printing costs, showing ability to pay | Court: Holland is able to pay; payment history and resources undermine indigency claim; recommend district court find ability to pay |
| Whether sanction was appropriate given prior warning | Holland: challenged dismissal despite warning due to belief claims meritorious | Med Staff: sanction appropriate under court’s warning that frivolous challenges would incur $500 per filing | Court: sanction was imposed after explicit capital-letter warning and Holland failed to heed it; sanction stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Willis v. Caterpillar, Inc., 199 F.3d 902 (7th Cir. 1999) (failure to timely object waives right to challenge a magistrate judge’s recommendation)
- Hunger v. Leininger, 15 F.3d 664 (7th Cir. 1994) (procedural waiver for failure to object to magistrate recommendations)
- Provident Bank v. Manor Steel Corp., 882 F.2d 258 (7th Cir. 1989) (same waiver principle for objections to magistrate judge reports)