James

James v. Madison Street Jail

Good Law
122 F.3d 27·97 Daily Journal DAR 9497·1997 WL 420293·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 18997·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5905
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 25, 1997Nos. 96-16384, 96-16386California362 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Curtis Ivan James, an Arizona state prisoner at the time these actions were filed, appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his complaint for failure to timely provide a trust-account statement pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (a)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for abuse of discretion, 1 and we reverse and remand.

In both appeals, the district court entered an order stating that James must file a *28 trust-account statement in accordance with § 1915(a)(2) within thirty days to proceed in forma pauperis. James submitted the trust-account statement with a sworn statement that he had mailed the statement within the thirty-day period, but the district court received and filed it after the thirty-day period had run.

We conclude that the rule for timely filing applicable to pro se prisoners articulated in Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 , 108 S.Ct. 2379 , 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988), applies to the filing of trust-account statements as required by § 1915(a)(2). See Faile v. Upjohn Co., 988 F.2d 985, 986-88 (9th Cir.1993). Because James submitted a sworn statement that he timely complied with the deadline imposed by the district court, “the district…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.