Barrera et al v. Mid America Management et al

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis as to all three Plaintiffs. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kenneth G. Gale on 1/15/2013.Mailed to pro se parties Vera Barrera, Anthony Lewis, Anadelia LeDesma by regular mail (df)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
VERA BARRERA, et al.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
MID AMERICA MANAGEMENT, )
et al.,
)
)
Defendant. )
)

Case No. 12-1305-MLB-KGG

ORDER ON MOTION TO PROCEED
WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FEES
In conjunction with their federal court Complaint alleging civil rights
discrimination and violations of the Fair Housing Act, Plaintiffs have filed a
Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (IFP Application, Doc. 3, sealed),
with an accompanying Affidavit of Financial Status for each of them (Doc. 3-1, at
1-18). Having reviewed the motion, the financial affidavits and their Complaint
(Doc. 1), the Court is prepared to rule.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), a federal court may authorize commencement of
an action without prepayment of fees, costs, etc., by a person who lacks financial
means. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). In so doing, the court considers the affidavit of
financial status included with the application. See id.

There is a liberal policy toward permitting proceedings in forma pauperis
when necessary to ensure that the courts are available to all citizens, not just those
who can afford to pay. See generally, Yellen v. Cooper, 828 F.2d 1471 (10th Cir.
1987). In construing the application and affidavit, courts generally seek to
compare an applicant’s monthly expenses to monthly income. See Patillo v. N.
Am. Van Lines, Inc., No. 02-2162, 2002 WL 1162684, at *1 (D.Kan. Apr. 15,
2002); Webb v. Cessna Aircraft, No. 00-2229, 2000 WL 1025575, at *1 (D.Kan.
July 17, 2000) (denying motion because “Plaintiff is employed, with monthly
income exceeding her monthly expenses by approximately $600.00”). With this in
mind, the Court will look at each Plaintiff individually.
A.

Vera Barrera.
In her supporting financial affidavit, Ms. Barrera indicates that she is 44

years old and single. (Doc. 3-1, at 1.) She lists her daughter as a dependent,
claiming that she provides $200.00/month for her support. (Id., at 2.) Ms.
Barrera’s daughter, who is also a Plaintiff in this matter, is, however, 22 years old
and not a minor. As such, the Court will not consider her to be Ms. Barrera’s
dependent for purposes of this motion.
Ms. Barrera is currently unemployed and receives a modest, monthly Social
Security Disability payment. (Id., at 3.) She lists no other sources of income.
2

Plaintiff does not own a home and pays a small amount in monthly rent.
(Id., at 5.) She does own a modest automobile outright. (Id., at 4.) She lists very
reasonable amounts for monthly expenses such as groceries, utilities, and
automobile insurance. (Id., at 5.) She also lists a medical bill for which she makes
monthly payments. (Id., at 6.) Given Plaintiff’s financial situation, the Court is
not surprised that she lists no cash on hand. (Id., at 4.) She has never filed for
bankruptcy. (Id., at 6.)
Considering all of the information contained in the financial affidavit, the
Court finds that Ms. Barrera has adequately established that she is entitled to file
this action without payment of fees and costs. Therefore, the Court GRANTS
Plaintiff Barrera leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directs that this case be
filed without payment of a filing fee.
B.

Anadelia LeDesma.
Ms. LeDesma states that she is 22 years old and single, with no dependents.

(Doc. 3-1, at 7.) She indicates that she is currently unemployed and lists no
employment history. (Id., at 8-9.) She lists no income or assets of any source, nor
does she list any expenses. Based on the information contained in Vera Barrera’s
financial affidavit as well as the Complaint Plaintiffs have filed, the Court surmises
that Ms. LeDesma lives entirely off her mother’s Social Security Disability
3

payment. The Court notes that there is no evidence that Ms. LeDesma herself
suffers from any type of disability or infirmary that would render her unable to be
gainfully employed. Regardless, the Court finds that Ms. LeDesma’s access to the
Court would be significantly impaired if the Court did not allow her to file this
action without payment of fees and costs. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff
LeDesma leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directs that this case be filed
without payment of a filing fee.
C.

Anthony Lewis.
In his supporting financial affidavit, Mr. Lewis indicates that he is 45 years

old and single, with no dependents. (Doc. 3-1, at 13-14.) He is currently
unemployed, but was previously employed by American Airlines for 13 years,
earning a modest monthly wage. (Id., at 14-15.) He lists no current income of any
sort and only a small amount of cash on hand. (Id., at 16.)
Mr. Lewis does not own real property, but does own an automobile on which
he owes significantly more than the vehicle is worth. (Id., at 15-16.) He lists only
a few monthly bills, including telephone, automobile insurance, and a student loan
(payment on which has apparently been deferred). (Id., at 17-18.)
Considering all of the information contained in Mr. Lewis’s financial
affidavit, the Court is somewhat concerned as to how he is able to meet his
4

monthly expenses, given his stated lack of income. Regardless, the Court finds
that he has adequately established that he is entitled to file this action without
payment of fees and costs. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff Lewis leave to
proceed in forma pauperis and directs that this case be filed without payment of a
filing fee.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Proceed
Without Prepayment of Fees (Doc. 3, sealed) is GRANTED as to each Plaintiff.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated at Wichita, Kansas, on this 15th day of January, 2013.
S/ KENNETH G. GALE

KENNETH G. GALE
United States Magistrate Judge

5