Background
Waseem Daker, a Georgia state inmate and serial litigant, filed a pro se complaint challenging his confinement conditions. He had previously been subject to filing injunctions in other federal courts requiring a contempt bond and submission of litigation history. The district court imposed a similar injunction in this case, requiring a one thousand five hundred dollar bond and dismissal of the complaint when Daker failed to post it. Daker appealed the injunction, the dismissal, and the denial of his motion to modify the injunction.
The court’s reasoning
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by applying the injunction to this case because Daker received notice and an opportunity to be heard through a show-cause order. The court found the injunction was not overbroad, as federal courts have inherent authority to protect their jurisdiction from abusive filings. However, the court concluded the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the case without considering Daker’s timely motion to modify the injunction based on his inability to afford the bond.
What it means going forward
Serial litigants may face permanent filing injunctions requiring contempt bonds, but courts must consider motions to modify such injunctions based on indigence before dismissing cases.