Scott v. Kelly

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “permitting [three- strikes prisoner] to include new, unconnected claims which have arisen since his initial filing defeats the purposes of filing fees and the ‘three strikes’ provision 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)”
• finding that inmate failed to state a claim under the ADA because the inmate did “not claim[] that he was subject to illegal discrimination because of his disability, but rather because he exercised his constitutional rights in petitioning the Department of Justice”
• denying prisoner’s request to add new, unrelated claims to an ongoing civil rights action as an improper attempt to circumvent the PLRA’s filing fee requirements and an attempt to escape the possibility of obtaining a “strike” under the “three strikes” rule
• denying prisoner’s request to add new, unrelated claims to an ongoing civil rights action as an improper attempt to circumvent the PLRA's filing fee requirements and an attempt to escape the possibility of obtaining a “strike” under the “three strikes” rule

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).