Appleton v. Intergraph Corporation

Filing 3

ORDER granting in part 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis . Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 5/15/07. (dcp, )

Download PDF
Appleton v. Intergraph Corporation Doc. 3 Case 5:07-cv-00179-HL Document 3 Filed 05/15/2007 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION : : Plaintiff, : : v. : : INTERGRAPH CORPORATION, : : Defendant. : _______________________________________ COLLEEN APPLETON, Civil Action No. 5:07-cv-179 ORDER Plaintiff Colleen Appleton ("Appleton") filed her Complaint (Doc. 1) in the Court on May 11, 2007. In addition, Appleton filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). For the reasons set forth below, the Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is granted in part. I. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS The two-step procedure a district court follows in processing a complaint filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 is well established. Initially, the district court must determine whether the plaintiff is unable to prepay costs and fees and is therefore a pauper under the statute. . . . Only after making a finding of poverty and docketing the case can the court proceed to the next question: whether the claim asserted is frivolous or malicious. Procup v. Strickland, 760 F.2d 1107, 1114 (11th Cir. 1985). Here, Appleton submitted a financial affidavit in which, under penalty of perjury, she attested to her financial condition. A review of Appleton's affidavit reveals that she expects 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 5:07-cv-00179-HL Document 3 Filed 05/15/2007 Page 2 of 3 to be unemployed in the very near future, but that she currently makes $2500.00 per month, though a large portion of that amount is allotted to business expenses. In addition, her personal1 monthly household expenses total $1390.00 per month. Although Appleton is not in bankruptcy, she does have significant debt and very little savings. The filing fee required for civil actions filed in this Court is $350.00. In the opinion of the Court, Appleton has sufficient assets and/or income to pay a portion of this fee but not the entire amount. Accordingly, the Complaint may be filed without prepayment of the entire $350.00 fee, but Appleton is required to pay $75.00. The Court must now analyze whether Appleton's claims are frivolous, malicious or meritless. Apparently, Appleton is a former government contractor. In her present lawsuit, she alleges she has been the victim of a conspiracy perpetuated primarily by Defendant Intergraph Corporation, her main business competitor, and facilitated by a network of courts,2 politicians, federal agencies and media outlets. Therefore, she has filed an action pursuant to the Sherman Act and various state laws. Taking Appleton's allegations as truthful, which the Court is obliged to do at this stage in the litigation, the Court finds her claim is not frivolous, malicious or meritless and therefore need not be dismissed under § 1915(e)(2)(B). III. CONCLUSION Appleton's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) is granted in part. The 1 Appleton is the sole member of her household. According to Appleton, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, and its Judge Wilbur D. Owens, Jr., are members of this shadowy network. 2 2 Case 5:07-cv-00179-HL Document 3 Filed 05/15/2007 Page 3 of 3 Court hereby orders Appleton to pay a partial filing fee of $75.00. Appleton shall have fortyfive (45) days from the date of her receipt of this order to pay the required partial filing fee to the clerk of court or to explain why she is not able to do so. Failure to make the required partial payment or to provide satisfactory explanation shall result in the dismissal of this lawsuit. There shall be no service in this case until further order of the Court. SO ORDERED, this the 15th day of May, 2007. HUGH LAWSON, JUDGE pdl s/ Hugh Lawson 3

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?