Krueger v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, CV-18-03059-PHX-JAT. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20181009885
Visitors: 2
Filed: Oct. 05, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 05, 2018
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. TEILBORG , Senior District Judge . Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. An affidavit in support of an IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331 , 339, 69 S.Ct. 85, 93 S.Ct. 43 (1948). The IFP statute does not itself define what constitutes insufficient assets. As this court ha
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. TEILBORG , Senior District Judge . Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. An affidavit in support of an IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331 , 339, 69 S.Ct. 85, 93 S.Ct. 43 (1948). The IFP statute does not itself define what constitutes insufficient assets. As this court has..
More
ORDER
JAMES A. TEILBORG, Senior District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
An affidavit in support of an IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339, 69 S.Ct. 85, 93 S.Ct. 43 (1948). The IFP statute does not itself define what constitutes insufficient assets. As this court has recognized, "[o]ne need not be absolutely destitute to obtain benefits of the in forma pauperis statute." Jefferson v. United States, 277 F.2d 723, 725 (9th Cir.1960).
Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015).
Here, Plaintiff receives $3,000.00 per month and spends $2,460.00 per month. Thus, Plaintiff has a $540.00 monthly surplus. The Court sees no reason why this surplus cannot be used to pay the filing fee. Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is denied. Plaintiff shall pay the filing fee within 7 days of this Order, or the Clerk of the Court shall dismiss this case (without prejudice).
Source: Leagle
