Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc.

United States District Court, D. Arizona

April 15, 2015

Dale Maisano, Plaintiff,
v.
Corizon Health Inc., et al., Defendants.

ORDER

STEPHEN M. McNAMEE, District Judge.

I. Background

Plaintiff Dale Maisano, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison Complex-Florence in Florence, Arizona, has abused the legal process egregiously and often. He is subject to a February 20, 2014 Injunction Order that enjoins Plaintiff from filing or lodging more than one in forma pauperis lawsuit per month in this Court, directs the Clerk of Court to refuse to accept any transfers pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) of cases filed by Plaintiff in other Districts, and reiterates and supplements the terms of the 1992 Restraining Order in Maisano v. Lewis, CV 92-1026-PHX-SMM (MS), that enjoins Plaintiff from filing any civil action in this or any other federal court without first obtaining leave of the court. See Doc. 4 in Maisano v. Clark, 14-CV-0001-TUC-RCC (D. Ariz. 2014).[1]

II. Plaintiff's Current Lawsuit

On March 16, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Eastern Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. On March 23, 2015, Plaintiff submitted another complaint, which was filed in the same action and is identical to the original Complaint, except it was signed on a different day. On March 23, 2015, United States District Court Judge Ronnie L. White, apparently unaware at that time of the February 14, 2014 Injunction Order, issued a Memorandum and Order requiring Plaintiff to file an amended complaint on a court-approved form and to either pay the filing and administrative fees or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

On March 26, 2015, Plaintiff filed a third complaint, which was filed in the same action and is identical to the prior complaints, except it was signed on a different day. On April 6, 2015, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint that raises entirely different issues than those raised in the original Complaint. Plaintiff also filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis.

On April 9, 2015, Judge White issued a Memorandum and Order concluding that the Complaint had "no legitimate connection" to the Eastern District of Missouri and that venue was proper in this District. Judge White noted that 28 U.S.C. § 1404 allows the Court to transfer the case to Arizona "in the interest of justice, " and found that "[t]he interests of justice dictate that plaintiff should not be permitted to attempt to circumvent the lawful injunction placed upon his litigation by the Arizona court by filing civil actions around the country."[2] Judge White transferred the action to this Court and " provisionally granted" the Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, "subject to modification by the transferee court."

The Clerk of Court received the action on April 10, 2015, and assigned it to the undersigned.

III. Dismissal of Action

Pursuant to the Injunction Order, to obtain leave to file, Plaintiff must file a motion for leave to file captioned as an "Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to File." In the Application, Plaintiff must:

(1) file an affidavit certifying that the claim or claims presented are new and have never been raised and disposed of on the merits by any federal court;
(2) certify that, to the best of his knowledge, the claim or claims presented are not frivolous or taken in bad faith; and
(3) affix to the Application a copy of February 20, 2014 Injunction Order in 14-CV-0001-TUC-RCC, the January 29, 2014 Order to Show Cause in 14-CV-0001-TUC-RCC, the 1992 Restraining Order in Maisano v. Lewis, 92-CV-1026-PHX-SMM (MS); and a list of all cases previously filed involving similar or related causes of action.

"The failure to comply strictly with the terms of th[e Injunction] Order shall be sufficient ground ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.