Nyanjom v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp.

Filing 10

ORDER granting 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kenneth G. Gale on 1/09/2013. Mailed to pro se party plaintiff by regular mail. (aw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
HAROLD M. NYANJOM,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
HAWKER BEECHCRAFT, INC.,
)
)
Defendant. )
)

Case No. 12-1461-JAR-KGG

ORDER ON MOTION TO PROCEED
WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FEES
In conjunction with his federal court Complaint alleging employment
discrimination (Doc. 1), Plaintiff Harold M. Nyanjom has filed a Motion to
Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (IFP Application, Doc. 3, sealed), with an
accompanying Affidavit of Financial Status (Doc. 3-1). Plaintiff initially filed this
matter in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
(See Doc. 2.) The matter was subsequently transferred to the District of Kansas,
after a determination that this was the proper venue. As such, Plaintiff used the
IFP application supplied by the Southern District of New York, which is not as
detailed as that used by the District of Kansas. The Court notes that Plaintiff has
filed a related matter in this Court against the same Defendant. See 6:12-cv-1438JTM-KGG. The Court will, therefore, use the District of Kansas IFP application

filed in that matter (12-1438, Doc.3, sealed) to supplement the information
contained in the IFP application used herein.
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”).
In his supporting financial affidavit and accompanying documentation filed
in case 12-1438-JTM-KGG, Plaintiff indicates he is 44 years old, married, with
two minor children who he supports financially. (Doc. 3-1, at 1-2.) His wife does
not work outside the home. Plaintiff is currently unemployed and was most
2

recently employed by Defendant. (Id., at 2-3.) He lists a sizeable monthly income
in the form of Social Security benefits, as well as an amount in the category of
“[p]ensions, trust funds, annuities or life insurance payment.” (Id., at 5.)
Plaintiff and his spouse do not own real property. (Id., at 3.) He does,
however, own three modest automobiles, with an estimated value of $3,000.00.
(Id., at 4.) He lists reasonable amounts for typical monthly expenses, including
rent, grocery expense, utilities, insurance, etc. (Id., at 5.) His expenses are not
greater than his listed monthly income, although the difference is only a couple
hundred dollars a month. He also indicates an amount of cash on hand. (Id., at 4.)
While this amount would be enough to cover the Court’s filing fee, the Court does
not find this money to be a factor considering Plaintiff’s status as head of a
household with minor children and numerous monthly expenses. Plaintiff has
previously filed for bankruptcy. (Id., at 6.)
Considering all of the information contained in the financial affidavit, the
Court finds that Plaintiff has adequately established that he is entitled to file this
action without payment of fees and costs. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff
leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directs that this case be filed without
payment of a filing fee.

3

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed
Without Prepayment of Fees (Doc. 3, sealed) is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated at Wichita, Kansas, on this 9th day of January, 2012.
S/KENNETH G. GALE

KENNETH G. GALE
United States Magistrate Judge

4