Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Callahan v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., 15 C 11641. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. Illinois Number: infdco20160210c94 Visitors: 4
Filed: Feb. 09, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 09, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER MILTON I. SHADUR , Senior District Judge . On February 1, 2016 this Court issued a minute entry that denied the In Forma Pauperis Application ("Application") tendered by plaintiff Edward Callahan ("Callahan"), in part because some of the answers in the Application had been presented in an unreadable and confusing form — but the minute entry went on to provide that if those answers were corrected the denial of the Application would be subject to possible reconsideration. No
More

MEMORANDUM ORDER

On February 1, 2016 this Court issued a minute entry that denied the In Forma Pauperis Application ("Application") tendered by plaintiff Edward Callahan ("Callahan"), in part because some of the answers in the Application had been presented in an unreadable and confusing form — but the minute entry went on to provide that if those answers were corrected the denial of the Application would be subject to possible reconsideration. Now Callahan has tried again, this time by submitting a revised Application coupled with a copy of a motion in a different case (No. 15 C 11642). That motion seeks reconsideration by this Court's colleague Honorable Rebecca Pallmeyer of her January 8, 2016 order that had granted him partial relief for a similar difficulty by allowing him to pay a reduced filing fee of $150. It is obvious that Judge Pallmeyer had the same difficulty in following Callahan's convoluted explanation that had led to this Court's action in the case before it.

Callahan's attempted explanation of the interrelationship of the finances of him, his wife and their daughter who lives with them remains a tangled web, but this Court is loath to preclude him from pursuing what appears to be a plausible claim under the standard established by the Twombly-Iqbal canon. It therefore defers ruling on the current Application and will allow this action to proceed on the merits, but on condition that if Callahan hereafter prevails and recovers damages in either or both of the action before Judge Pallmeyer (Case No. 15 C 11642) and this action (Case No. 15 C 11641), he will be required to pay the full filing fee in this action. Meanwhile this Court is contemporaneously issuing its customary initial scheduling order in this case, and it will look to Callahan's counsel to pursue the lawsuit in the regular course.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer