Crump v. 180 Degrees Halfway House Staff et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
WILLIE JAMES CRUMP,
Plaintiff,
v.
180 	DEGREES 	HALFWAY 	HOUSE
STAFF, 	DAVID 	PHAFF, 	RICHARD
COFFEY, and TONY HUNTER,
Defendants.
Case No. 26-CV-1891 (KMM/JFD)
ORDER
Plaintiff Willie James Crump, a prisoner, has applied for in forma pauperis (“IFP”)
status. (See Dkt. No. 2 (“IFP Certificate”)).1 Because Mr. Crump is a prisoner, see 28
U.S.C. § 1915(h), the IFP Application falls under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b), which requires an
initial partial filing fee for prisoners seeking IFP status in civil actions. See, e.g., Ashley v.
Dilworth, 147 F.3d 715, 716 (8th Cir. 1998). This fee is 20 percent of the greater of (1) the
average monthly deposits to the plaintiff’s facility trust account in the six months
immediately before the complaint’s filing, or (2) the average balance in the plaintiff’s
account during the same period. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).
1 Mr. Crump has not submitted a full IFP application; rather, he has simply filed the
Certificate of Authorized Prison Official that prisoners generally submit as part of an IFP
application. The Court assumes for present purposes that this reflects Mr. Crump’s intent
to apply to proceed IFP here.
CASE 0:26-cv-01891-KMM-JFD Doc. 4 Filed 05/05/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Materials submitted by Mr. Crump show that he must pay an initial partial filing fee
of $25.67.2 This action will not proceed until Mr. Crump pays this fee in full. If he fails to
pay within 21 days of this Order’s date, the Court will treat the action as abandoned and
recommend dismissal without prejudice for lack of prosecution. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
Finally, the Court offers Mr. Crump the following warnings:
• 	If Mr. Crump proceeds by paying the $25.67 initial partial filing fee, he will
also have to pay the remaining $324.33 of this action’s $350.00 statutory filing
fee in installments. Officials at Mr. Crump’s facility will be notified of this
requirement and authorized to withdraw funds from his trust account to remit
to the Court, as per § 1915(b), regardless of the action’s outcome.
• 	Upon payment of the initial partial filing fee, the Court will review Mr.
Crump’s complaint (Dkt. No. 1 (“Complaint”)) to determine if he has pleaded
a viable claim for relief within the Court’s jurisdiction.3 If the Court finds that
2 The IFP Certificate states that the amount of his average monthly deposits during the
preceding six-month period (or, at least, the portion of that period during which he was at
MCF–Faribault) was $128.36. (See IFP Cert. 1.) A copy of Mr. Crump’s trust-account
statement submitted with the Certificate (see id. at 2) indicates that his average balance
over the same period was $47.57. Because the deposits amount exceeds the balance
amount, Mr. Crump’s initial partial filing fee in this case, under the formula prescribed by
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), is 20 percent of the average deposits amount, or $25.67.
3 Mr. Crump should carefully consider whether to proceed with this case, as the Complaint
has significant issues. Several of its potential legal theories cannot succeed in their current
form: claims based on Medicare or False Claims Act fraud must be brought by an attorney
on behalf of the United States and cannot be pursued by a pro se plaintiff; claims alleging
the misuse of taxpayer funds require a kind of standing Mr. Crump likely does not have;
and claims raised on behalf of other halfway-house residents cannot be pursued by a
nonlawyer at all. Other possible claims face structural obstacles. Any challenge to the
February 2025 revocation that apparently returned Mr. Crump to prison is likely barred
unless and until the revocation has been invalidated through habeas or other appropriate
proceedings, and damages under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act
are 	unavailable 	against 	individual 	defendants. 	Furthermore, 	any 	conditions-of-
confinement, free-exercise, retaliation, and equal-protection theories in the Complaint
likely founder based on the need to say what each named individual defendant (that is,
Mr. Phaff, Mr. Coffey, and Mr. Hunter) personally did or knew, rather than describing the
conduct of “staff” as a group. And because federal law bars prisoners from recovering
CASE 0:26-cv-01891-KMM-JFD Doc. 4 Filed 05/05/26 Page 2 of 3

3
the Complaint is frivolous or malicious, or fails to state a claim for which relief
can be granted, Mr. Crump will incur a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Accumulating three or more “strikes” will significantly restrict Mr. Crump’s
ability to proceed IFP in federal court
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT
IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. 	Plaintiff Willie James Crump must pay an initial partial filing fee of
at least $25.67 within 21 days of this Order’s date.
2. 	Should Mr. Crump fail to pay the initial partial filing fee, the Court
will recommend dismissing this action without prejudice for failure to
prosecute.
Dated: May 5, 2025 	_s/ John F. Docherty_________
JOHN F. DOCHERTY
United States Magistrate Judge
damages for purely emotional or psychological injury without a showing of physical injury,
much of the monetary relief Mr. Crump seeks may be unavailable even on the claims that
survive. Given these concerns, and other issues that may arise if this action moves forward,
Mr. Crump may want to reconsider before committing $350.00 to pursue this litigation.
CASE 0:26-cv-01891-KMM-JFD Doc. 4 Filed 05/05/26 Page 3 of 3