Photo Credit: https://perma.cc/L4WN-ATJT
If a prisoner’s claim requires dismissal under the “three-strikes provision” but is also frivolous or unmeritorious, must the court dismiss the claim without prejudice or may it opt to dismiss the claim on the merits with prejudice instead? This question was presented to the Eleventh Circuit in White v. Lemma. The Eleventh Circuit concluded that “though a court must procedurally dismiss without prejudice the claim of a prisoner who has struck out under the three-strikes provision and failed to pay the filing fee, the court may also consider the merits to dismiss the case with prejudice instead.”
READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE!
Mollie Beth Amick*
Photo Credit: httpswww.californialandusedevelopmentlaw.com20170713supreme-court-announces-new-test-for-regulatory-takings-claims
In Knick v. Township of Scott, the Supreme Court overruled Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, which had created a de-facto state-litigation requirement for plaintiffs bringing federal takings claims. Specifically, the Court in Knick held that a property owner may proceed directly to federal court as soon as his property is taken without compensation, even if there are state remedies to provide compensation after the taking occurs.
READ FULL ARTICLE