Doswell v. Tanglewood Trace et al

Filing 55

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 52 MOTION for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis re: 51 Notice of Appeal filed by Karen Doswell. Signed by Judge Rudy Lozano on 10/5/16. (cc: USCA). (cer)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
KAREN DOSWELL,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TANGLEWOOD TRACE AND
MAXIM STAFFING
SOLUTIONS,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CAUSE NO. 3:15-CV-441

Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Appeal in
Forma Pauperis, filed by Plaintiff, Karen Doswell, on September 10,
2016 (DE #52).

For the reasons set forth below, the Motion (DE

#52) is DENIED.
Doswell’s notice of appeal indicates she is appealing three
orders: this Court’s opinion and order issued on July 12, 2016 (DE
#47) which granted the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant, Maxim
Staffing Solutions (DE #33) and the motion to dismiss filed by
Defendants CW LLC, Tanglewood Trace (DE #35); the Magistrate
Judge’s order dated March 31, 2016 denying Doswell’s motion to
amend the complaint (DE #42); and the Magistrate Judge’s denial of
the motion to reconsider (DE #46).
In this case, Doswell indicates her issues on appeal are
“whether libel and slander against me is protected by absolute

privilege or qualified privilege.”

(DE #52.)

“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).

Doswell’s claims were properly dismissed and the Magistrate
properly denied the motion to amend.

This Court already addressed

the arguments Doswell sets forth in her appeal.

The Court found

that Indiana law recognizes an absolute privilege that protects
relevant statements made in the course of judicial proceedings.
See Hartman v. Keri, 883 N.E.2d 774, 777 (Ind. 2008).

Because the

communication with the Indiana Department of Health was made in the
course of a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding, the Court found
it was covered by an absolute privilege.

In the present motion,

Doswell does not raise any arguable basis for overturning the
Court’s dismissal of her case, and instead simply lists the issue
she made previously during this case.

This appeal is not taken in

good faith because no “reasonable person could suppose that the
appeal has some merit.”

Walker v. O’Brien, 216 F.3d 626, 632 (7th

Cir. 2000).
For the reasons set forth above, the motion for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (DE #52) is DENIED.
DATED: October 5, 2016

/s/ RUDY LOZANO, Judge
United States District Court

2