Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
CHRISTOPHER L. HARRIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JOHN L. KAMMERZELL, U.S.
Marshal, Against his Individual and
Official Capacity,
No. 11-1206
(D.C. No. 1:11-cv-00435-LTB)
(D. Colo.)
Defendant-Appellee.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. It may be cited,
however, for its persuasive value consistent with Federal Rule of Appellate
Procedure 32.1 and Tenth Circuit Rule 32.1.
After examining the appellate record, this three-judge panel
determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material assistance in
the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R.
34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
1
-3-
Mr. Harriss lengthy and abusive filing history. 2 After considering Mr. Harriss
response to the order to show cause, the district court imposed filing restrictions
that (1) enjoined Mr. Harris from filing pro se any civil action in the District of
Colorado in which he seeks release from prison based on contract law, the law of
commercial transactions, or any other theory of law that is legally frivolous, and
(2) set forth a procedure under which any future pro se pleadings submitted by
Mr. Harris will be reviewed by a magistrate judge and then by a district court
judge before any determination is made that a particular pleading should not be
filed because it is the type of pleading that Mr. Harris is enjoined from filing.
Based upon Mr. Harriss filing history, we conclude that these restrictions are
narrowly tailored and appropriate under Ysais.
CONCLUSION
Because Mr. Harriss complaint presents only averments that are legally
frivolous, and because, based on Mr. Harriss filing history, the filing restrictions
Jerome A. Holmes
Circuit Judge