Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

ROGERS v. COLVIN, C13-5627-RSL-BAT. (2013)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20130823d49 Visitors: 11
Filed: Aug. 01, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 01, 2013
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Cortina M. Rogers has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") in this Social Security disability appeal. Dkt. 1. In her application, plaintiff states that her spouse earns $4,000 net pay per month, and that she and her spouse receive $1,400 per month in pensions, annuities, or life insurance payments, and $1,000 per month in disability, unemployment, workers compensation, or public assistance for a total
More

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Cortina M. Rogers has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") in this Social Security disability appeal. Dkt. 1. In her application, plaintiff states that her spouse earns $4,000 net pay per month, and that she and her spouse receive $1,400 per month in pensions, annuities, or life insurance payments, and $1,000 per month in disability, unemployment, workers compensation, or public assistance for a total of $6,400 per month in income. Plaintiff states that one minor child, two adult children, one child in jail, and one adult step-daughter with her husband and children are all completely dependent on her or her spouse for support; she also lists numerous expenses.

Even with the expenses and dependents plaintiff lists, her level of income makes her ineligible for IFP status, which is reserved for the truly indigent. The Court therefore recommends that plaintiff's IFP application be denied and she be directed to pay the filing fee within 30 days of the date this recommendation is adopted or the Clerk will close the file.

A proposed order accompanies this Report and Recommendation. Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be filed no later than August 15, 2013. This matter will be ready for the Court's consideration on August 16, 2013. Objections shall not exceed twelve pages. The failure to timely object may affect the right to appeal.

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