Barnett v. Bridges, et al.

Circuit 10Jul 14, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 64/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Dismissed

The Tenth Circuit denied Oklahoma prisoner Christopher J. Barnett’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Although Barnett claimed imminent danger, the court adopted the Second Circuit’s two-part nexus test (traceability and redressability) and found Barnett’s alleged danger was not redressable by the relief sought, so the fee exemption was unavailable.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether a prisoner who invokes the imminent-danger exception to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) must show both traceability and redressability (a two-part nexus) between the alleged danger and the claims in the complaint.

Circuit Positions

Circuit 2Circuit 9Circuit 10(this circuit)Federal Circuit

Imminent-danger exception requires BOTH traceability and redressability (two-part nexus test)

Circuit 4

Imminent-danger exception requires nexus/traceability but NOT redressability

Conflict Summary

The Second, Ninth, Federal, and now Tenth Circuits require that the alleged imminent danger be both fairly traceable to the defendants’ conduct and redressable by the requested relief, while the Fourth Circuit requires only a causal nexus (traceability) without a separate redressability showing.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Christopher J. Barnett
Appellee:Carrie Bridges, Charles Phillips, Tracie Adams, Jody Miller, Katrena Davis, Kevin Hodgson