Chavis v. Chappius

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a plaintiff proceeding IFP under the imminent danger exception can assert additional claims that do not have a nexus to the danger
• holding that plaintiff satisfied imminent-danger exception when he alleged that officer beat him and threatened to do so again
• holding that past harms that are part of an “ ongoing pattern of acts” that continues can satisfy the imminent danger exception
• holding that “sequential dismissals on strike grounds can provide separate strikes under § 1915(g)”
• holding that if a prisoner’s action is dismissed for a strike reason, and the prisoner’s subsequent appeal of that dismissal is also dismissed for a strike reason, those dismissals count as two strikes under Section 1915(g)
• holding that when a \three strikes\ plaintiff adequately alleges imminent danger on some claims, the action may proceed on any other claims contained in the same complaint, even though they may lack a nexus to imminent danger

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).