Brown v. Lion Share Investments, LLC et al
ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Denying 19 Plaintiff's Application for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2017)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. 17-cv-05531-EMC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
LION SHARE INVESTMENTS, LLC,
Docket No. 19
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
Plaintiff has applied for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on her appeal to the Ninth
Circuit from this Court’s order denying her application for a stay of a bankruptcy court order
pending her appeal. “An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in
writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). The Ninth Circuit has held that
“if at least one issue or claim is found to be non-frivolous, leave to proceed in forma pauperis must
be granted for the case as a whole.” Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir.
Plaintiff appears to meet the financial requirements for in forma pauperis status. The Court
nevertheless DENIES her request because her appeal does not present a non-frivolous claim, for
the same reasons stated in the Court’s order of denial. See Docket No. 13; In re Perl, 811 F.3d
1120, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2016) (under California law, “no occupant of the premises retains any
possessory interest of any kind following service of the writ of possession”).
This disposes of Docket No. 19.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 31, 2017
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District 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?