Beasley v. Social Security Administration

Filing 3

ORDER denying 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; if Mr. Beasley wishes to proceed with this action, he must pay the applicable filing fee, within 30 days of the issuance of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 11/26/2024. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION GEORGE BEASLEY v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 3:24-cv-00208-KGB-JTK KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner Social Security DEFENDANT ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiff George Beasley’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (Doc. No. 1) Mr. Beasley’s application shows he earns $5,642.21 per month. The listed expenses total to $3,282.96 per month, including a car payment “for a friend.” The purpose of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 is to ensure that indigent litigants have an entre, not a barrier, to the federal courts. In re Williamson, 786 F.2d 1336, 1338 (8th Cir. 1986) (quoting Souder v. McGuire, 516 F.2d 820, 823 (3rd Cir. 1975)). Although a claimant need not be completely destitute to take advantage of the IFP statute, he or she must show that paying the filing fee would result in an undue financial hardship. Williamson, 786 F.2d at 1338. With the information provided to the Court, Mr. Beasley has not established that he is indigent or that paying the filing fee would result in undue financial hardship. Accordingly, his Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED. If Mr. Beasley wishes to proceed with this action, he must pay the applicable filing fee, within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this Order. Failure to comply within the required period of time may result in summary dismissal of Mr. Beasley’s complaint. SO ORDERED THIS 26th day of November, 2024. ____________________________________ JEROME T. KEARNEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?