Honig v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the in forma pauperis statute calls for simultaneous, not sequential, recoupment of multiple filing fees incurred by an indigent prisoner and recognizing that a prisoner who had filed five actions could exhaust his prisoner account each month
• holding that the in forma pauperis statute calls for simultaneous, not sequential, recoupment of multiple filing fees incurred by an indigent prisoner, and recognizing that a prisoner who had filed five actions could exhaust his prisoner account each month
• noting that 28 U.S.C. § 1915 requires “prisoners to pay filing fees for the suits or appeals they launch”
• finding that a denial of costs is not warranted simply because a lawsuit was not brought in bad faith, since “[a]ll parties to a federal action have an obligation to act in good faith and with proper purpose”
• upholding Court of Appeals’ ruling that prisoner’s filing fees in current case were due simultaneously with fees owed in prior cases because such an approach “more vigorously serves the statutory objective of containing prisoner litigation….”
• rejecting argument 5 13 || that the possibility that an inmate’s “account might be reduced to zero upon his filing or joming a 14 || fifth case” shows that only 20% in total can be withdrawn in a month

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).