HOWARD v. BECIDDY et al

Filing 12

ORDER DENYING 11 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. Ordered by Judge Marc Thomas Treadwell on 2/14/2013. (tlh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION  
CECIL HOWARD,
Plaintiff,
v.
OFFICER BECIDDY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:12-CV-399(MTT)

ORDER
Before the Court is the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis. (Doc.
11). The Plaintiff seeks to appeal the Court’s Order (Doc. 6) dismissing his Complaint without
prejudice. (Doc. 8). The Plaintiff provided the financial information requested in the form
affidavit but failed to elaborate his stated issues on appeal.
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a) sets out the requirements for an appellant
in a civil case who wishes to proceed in forma pauperis. According to Rule 24(a)(1), the
appellant “must attach an affidavit that…(A) shows in the detail prescribed by Form 4 of the
Appendix of Forms [his] inability to pay or give security for the fees and costs; (B) claims an
entitlement to redress; and (C) states the issues that [he] intends to present on appeal.”
Here, the Plaintiff’s Affidavit is insufficient in that it neither claims an entitlement to redress
nor states the issues that are presented on appeal.
Therefore, the Plaintiff has failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 24. Accordingly,
his Motion is DENIED.
SO ORDERED, this 14th day of February, 2013.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT