John C. Duvall sought to appeal without paying the $605 appellate filing and docketing fees after Judge Bough dismissed his lawsuit against Travis Terry and other defendants on March 25. The court had granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the entire case, though the specific nature of Duvall's claims was not detailed in the order.
Judge Bough ruled that Duvall cannot proceed without paying fees because he falls under the federal "three strikes" provision that bars indigent plaintiffs from filing additional lawsuits without fees if they have previously had three cases dismissed as frivolous or malicious. "Plaintiff is subject to the 'three strikes' provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)," Bough wrote, citing a 2016 case where Duvall was previously identified as subject to these restrictions.
The judge also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, writing that "this case presents issues on appeal that are legally frivolous." Under federal law, courts can block fee waivers for appeals they determine lack merit, and Bough referenced his earlier March 25 order dismissing the case as support for his finding of frivolity.
The procedural history shows this case was filed in the Central Division of the Western District of Missouri and assigned case number 2:25-cv-04253-SRB. After the defendants successfully moved to dismiss the lawsuit, Duvall filed a notice of appeal but failed to either pay the required fees or submit proper paperwork requesting a fee waiver.
Duvall's previous litigation history appears to include at least one prior case, Duvall v. Troutt, filed in 2016 in the same court, which contributed to his classification under the "three strikes" rule that limits repeat filers' access to fee waivers. The rule is designed to prevent abuse of the court system by plaintiffs who repeatedly file meritless lawsuits.
The court's order leaves Duvall with limited options: he must either pay the full $605 in appellate fees or file a new application for fee waiver directly with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, though his previous strike history would likely make approval difficult. Judge Bough directed the clerk to forward the case to the appeals court for further processing.
The ruling illustrates how federal courts use procedural mechanisms to manage repeat litigants while still preserving access to appeals for those who can demonstrate good faith legal arguments. Cases involving prisoners and pro se plaintiffs often present these procedural hurdles when courts determine the underlying claims lack legal merit.