11th Cir.

Meeks v. Holmes Correctional Institution

May 19, 2026 ·5:24-cv-00233-AW-MJF ·Per Curiam · By Aisha Johnson

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court's dismissal of a pro se prisoner's civil rights complaint without prejudice. The court held that the dismissal was a proper exercise of the district court's inherent authority to enforce its rules regarding litigation history disclosure.

Background

Jay Alan Meeks, a Florida prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Section nineteen eighty-three complaint alleging excessive force and failure to intervene by corrections officers. The district court required him to complete a standardized form disclosing his litigation history under penalty of perjury. Meeks failed to disclose a prior habeas petition and appeal, as well as a transferred civil lawsuit. The district court dismissed the complaint without prejudice as a sanction for violating local rules and court orders.

The court’s reasoning

The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the dismissal for abuse of discretion. The court noted that while the Prison Litigation Reform Act does not require litigation history forms, the Northern District of Florida’s local rules do. The court held that a prisoner must provide complete answers to the form’s questions regarding litigation history. Because Meeks failed to comply with these rules and orders, the district court had the inherent authority to sanction him. The court emphasized that a dismissal without prejudice is appropriate when a party fails to comply with court orders and does not require a finding of willfulness or bad faith.

What it means going forward

The plaintiff may file a new complaint bringing the same claims, as the dismissal was without prejudice and the statute of limitations has not run.