UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 98-50037
Summary Calendar
____________________
BARBARA JO WEBB,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WAYNE SCOTT, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; PAMELA WILLIAM, Warden of Hobby Unit,
Marlin, Texas; KENNETH SELLER, Correctional Officer #3 at Texas
Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division, Hobby
Unit,
Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court,
for the Western District of Texas
(USDC No. W-97-CV-242)
_________________________________________________________________
December 3, 1998
Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Barbara Jo Webb, Texas inmate #335682, appeals, pro se, the
denial of her motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP)
in the district court and the dismissal of her complaint based on
her inability to pay the initial partial filing fee. (Webb’s
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
motions for supplementation of the record and for discovery are
DENIED.)
The district court ordered Webb to pay, within 30 days, an
initial partial filing fee of $7.50, as per 28 U.S.C. §
1915(b)(1),(2). The district court did not err in its initial
order dismissing the complaint, because this amount had not been
paid and Webb had not informed the court that she had no money in
her prison account to pay it. However, Webb’s FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e)
motion and accompanying exhibits demonstrated that she had a zero
balance in her prison account for the 30 days following the
district court’s order and thus had no means with which to comply
with that order.
“In no event shall a prisoner be prohibited from bringing a
civil action ... for the reason that the prisoner has no assets and
no means by which to pay the initial partial filing fee.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(4). Under this provision, Webb should be permitted to
proceed IFP while remaining responsible for paying the full filing
fee through installment payments. See Norton v. Dimazana, 122 F.3d
286, 290-91 (5th Cir. 1998); Walp v. Scott, 115 F.3d 308, 310 (5th
Cir. 1997).
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is VACATED and the
case is REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
VACATED AND REMANDED; MOTIONS DENIED
2