Szanyi v. State of Indiana et al

Filing 4

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Robert A Szanyi and denying 2 MOTION to Appeal from Family Social Services State of Indiana and Medicaid filed by Robert A Szanyi. ***Civil Case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, but the dismissal will not prevent him from pursuing whatever remedies he may have available in state court. Signed by Judge Robert L Miller, Jr on 6/5/13. cc:pltf (kjp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
HAMMOND DIVISION
ROBERT SZANYI,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF INDIANA, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CAUSE NO. 2:13-CV-190 RM

OPINION AND ORDER
Robert Szanyi, a pro se plaintiff, filed case initiating documents titled, “Motion for
Judicial Review,” and “Motion to Appeal,” along with a motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis. (DE 1-3.) Under the in forma pauperis statute, the court must screen the
complaint and dismiss if it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such
relief, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
It is apparent from Robert Szanyi’s filings that he is trying to seek judicial review of
a determination by the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration regarding his
eligibility for state Medicaid benefits. (See DE 1 at 7.) He has filed in the wrong court.
Indiana provides for judicial review of such determinations in its courts. IND. CODE § 421.5-5-1; see also Evans v. State of Indiana, 908 N.E.2d 1254 (Ind. App. Ct. 2009) (deciding
petition for review filed by state medicaid claimant). Federal courts are courts of limited
jurisdiction, Northeastern Rural Elec. Membership Corp. v. Wabash Valley, 707 F.3d 883,
890 (7th Cir. 2013), and there is no federal vehicle by which Mr. Szanyi can seek judicial

review of a state agency decision regarding his eligibility for a state program. Accordingly,
his complaint will be dismissed, but the dismissal will not prevent him from pursuing
whatever remedies he may have available in state court.
For these reasons, the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (DE 3) and
motion to appeal (DE 2) are DENIED, and the complaint (DE 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
SO ORDERED
ENTERED: June 5 , 2013
/s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr.
Judge
United States District Court

2