Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security, 19-cv-1074 JPG/DGW. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20191009h26
Visitors: 6
Filed: Oct. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 08, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 3). A federal court may permit an indigent party to proceed without pre-payment of fees. 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(1). Nevertheless, a court can deny a qualified plaintiff leave to file in forma pauperis or can dismiss a case if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious. 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The test for determining if a
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 3). A federal court may permit an indigent party to proceed without pre-payment of fees. 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(1). Nevertheless, a court can deny a qualified plaintiff leave to file in forma pauperis or can dismiss a case if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious. 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The test for determining if an..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on the plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 3). A federal court may permit an indigent party to proceed without pre-payment of fees. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Nevertheless, a court can deny a qualified plaintiff leave to file in forma pauperis or can dismiss a case if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The test for determining if an action is frivolous or without merit is whether the plaintiff can make a rational argument on the law or facts in support of the claim. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Corgain v. Miller, 708 F.2d 1241, 1247 (7th Cir. 1983). When assessing a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, a district court should inquire into the merits of the plaintiff's claims, and if the court finds them to be frivolous, it should deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Lucien v. Roegner, 682 F.2d 625, 626 (7th Cir. 1982).
Here, the plaintiff submitted an affidavit that shows she is not indigent. Therefore, the Court DENIES the motion to proceed in forma pauperis without prepayment of fees and costs (Doc. 3).
Further, the filing fee is due by October 22, 2019. Failure to pay the filing fee by the due date may result in dismissal of this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
