Coleman v. Tollefson

Background

A state prisoner, André Lee Coleman, had three federal lawsuits dismissed while incarcerated. After the third dismissal was entered but before the appeals court decided it, Coleman filed four more federal suits and asked to proceed without paying court fees. He argued the third dismissal should not count as a strike because it was still under appeal. Lower courts and a divided Sixth Circuit rejected his view, and the Court reviewed the question because other federal appeals courts had ruled differently.

Reasoning

The central question was whether a trial-court dismissal counts as one of the statute’s three qualifying dismissals even if the dismissal is still being appealed. The Court read the law literally: an action or appeal “was dismissed” and such a dismissal is an occurrence that counts as a prior occasion. The opinion noted that the statute treats trial and appellate stages separately, that trial judgments ordinarily take effect unless stayed, and that the statute’s purpose is to block repetitive, frivolous prisoner suits. The Court acknowledged the small risk that an erroneous dismissal might temporarily deny a prisoner fee-free access, but found that risk limited and outweighed by the law’s filtering purpose. The Justices also declined to decide a related hypothetical about appealing from a third strike.

Real world impact

Because the Court counted the trial dismissal, Coleman and similarly situated inmates who have three qualifying dismissals may not file additional federal suits without paying fees while an appeal is pending. Affected prisoners must either pay filing fees, drop cases, or seek relief later if an appeal reverses the dismissal.