Tate v. Blanton et al
Filing
65
ORDER denying 62 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 11/29/2011. (nbp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
VALDOSTA DIVISION
DAVID TATE,
:
:
Plaintiff
:
:
VS.
:
:
FRANK BLANTON,
:
:
Defendants
:
_____________________________________
CIVIL ACTION NO: 7:09-CV-142-HL
ORDER
Plaintiff DAVID TATE has filed a Notice of Appeal [Doc. 62], which as also been
construed as a Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis on Appeal. The basis for Plaintiff’s appeal is
unclear, and in the Court’s best judgment, an appeal cannot be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(3). Thus, having been carefully considered, Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed in forma
pauperis on Appeal is DENIED.
If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with his appeal, he must pay the entire $ 455.00 appellate filing
fee. Because Plaintiff cannot pay the $ 455.00 immediately, he must pay using the partial payment
plan described under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). Pursuant to §1915(b), the prison account custodian
where Plaintiff is incarcerated shall cause to be remitted to the Clerk of this Court monthly payments
of 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to Plaintiff’s account until the $ 455.00 appellate
filing fee has been paid in full. Twenty percent of any deposits into the prisoner’s account shall be
withheld by the prison account custodian who, on a monthly basis, shall forward the amount
withheld from the prisoner’s account to the Clerk of this Court each time the amount in the account
exceeds $10.00 until the total filing fee of $455.00 has been paid. Checks should be made payable
to “Clerk, U.S. District Court.”
The Clerk of Court is accordingly DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to the custodian
of the prison in which Plaintiff is incarcerated.
SO ORDERED AND DIRECTED this 29th day of November, 2011.
s/ Hugh Lawson
HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
jlr
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?