Stone v. South Central Regional Jail
This text of Stone v. South Central Regional Jail (Stone v. South Central Regional Jail) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6399
TAMMY M. STONE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL JAIL; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BUCKNER, Booking/Holding,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 04-6400
MS. PERRY, Counselor of South Central Regional Jail,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 04-6401
versus KANAWHA COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; J. L. WALKER,
No. 04-6402
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
No. 04-6403
RICK HALLORICK, Magistrate,
No. 04-6404
- 2 - versus
JEFF STEWART, Public Defender,
No. 04-6405
KRT SUPERVISOR WARNER,
No. 04-6406
DEPUTY BRALEY, Kanawha County Sheriff’s Department and Quincy Detachment,
No. 04-6407
- 3 - TAMMY M. STONE,
COMMANDER HILL, West Virginia State Police; TROOPER ZERKLE; SERGEANT FRYE; SERGEANT BOWMAN; MARK JOHNS,
No. 04-6408
SOUTH CHARLESTON CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Patrol Division; OFFICER EARY,
No. 04-6409
SERGEANT JARRELL; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER, South Central Regional Jail,
- 4 - No. 04-6410
DARRELL S. TOWNSEND; LAURIE A. TOWNSEND,
No. 04-6411
DONNA KAY MURPHY; POCA POST OFFICE; LAURIE TOWNSEND; DARRELL TOWNSEND,
No. 04-6412
MICHAEL CLIFFORD, Prosecutor,
- 5 - Defendant - Appellee.
No. 04-6413
LARRY GLASSBURG, SR.,
No. 04-6414
DANNY JONES, Mayor or former Kanawha County Sheriff,
No. 04-6415
- 6 - WILLIAM LESTER,
No. 04-6416
DOUGLAS WENDEL ARTRIP; LISA FARRELL; DENNIS ARTRIP; MARY ANN ARTRIP,
No. 04-6417
ADMINISTRATOR MURRAY, Kanawha County and State Court,
No. 04-6418
- 7 - versus
MEREDITH PERRY, Counselor; UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL JAIL; DAVID WALKER, Psychiatrist; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER; JOHN MCKAY, Administrator; JEFF STEWART, Lawyer; PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE,
No. 04-6419
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE,
No. 04-6420
DEPUTY LANE; KANAWHA COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,
- 8 - No. 04-6421
LIEUTENANT ROGERS, Chief Correctional Officer,
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, District Judge. (CA-03-2408-2; CA-03-2431-2; CA-03-2437-2; CA-03- 2438-2; CA-03-2439-2; CA-03-2440-2; CA-03-2454-2; CA-03-2455-2; CA- 03-2456-2; CA-03-2457-2; CA-03-2458-2; CA-03-2474-2; CA-03-2475-2; CA-03-2477-2; CA-03-2478-2; CA-03-2479-2; CA-03-2480-2; CA-03-2481- 2; CA-03-2483-2; CA-03-2484-2; CA-03-2491-2; CA-03-2492-2; CA-03- 2497-2)
Submitted: July 9, 2004 Decided: August 9, 2004
Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tammy M. Stone, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
- 9 - PER CURIAM:
Tammy M. Stone appeals the district court’s dismissal of
her suits and entry of an order enjoining her from proceeding in
forma pauperis in any future civil action.
After reviewing the record, we affirm the dismissal of
Stone’s suits on the reasoning of the district court. We affirm,
as modified, the district court’s entry of an injunction against
Stone.
Federal courts have both the inherent power and the
constitutional obligation to protect their jurisdiction from
conduct that impairs their ability to carry out Article III
functions. In re Martin-Trigona, 737 F.2d 1254, 1261 (2d Cir.
1984); see Procup v. Strickland, 792 F.2d 1069, 1074 (11th Cir.
1986); Graham v. Riddle, 554 F.2d 133, 134-35 (4th Cir. 1977).
Given Stone’s history of abuse of the legal system, we find that
the district court did not abuse its discretion in enjoining Stone
from future filings. Nonetheless, the district court must take
into account that no person should ever be denied his right to the
processes of the court. In re Green, 598 F.2d 1126, 1127 (8th Cir.
1979). Therefore, we modify the district court's order to read,
“Tammy Stone is hereby enjoined from proceeding in forma pauperis
in any civil action without first obtaining leave of court.”
We grant Stone’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
- 10 - contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
- 11 -
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Stone v. South Central Regional Jail, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stone-v-south-central-regional-jail-ca4-2004.