Williams v. Milligans Enterprises Inc.
ORDER granting 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees. The deadline for process of service is extended up to and including May 31, 2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Gwynne E. Birzer on 3/31/2021. (kf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
DJUAN PRESTION WILLIAMS,
MILLIGANS ENTERPRISES INC.,
) Case No. 20-1357-JWB-GEB
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Djuan Preston Williams’ Motion to
Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (ECF No. 3, sealed) and supporting Affidavit of
Financial Status (ECF No. 3-1 sealed). For the reasons outlined below, Plaintiff’s Motion
(ECF No. 3) is GRANTED.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court has discretion1 to authorize filing of a civil
case “without prepayment of fees or security thereof, by a person who submits an affidavit
that . . . the person is unable to pay such fees or give security thereof.” “Proceeding in
forma pauperis in a civil case ‘is a privilege, not a right—fundamental or otherwise.’”2 To
determine whether a party is eligible to file without prepayment of the fee, the Court
Barnett ex rel. Barnett v. Nw. Sch., No. 00-2499-KHV, 2000 WL 1909625, *1 (D. Kan. Dec. 26,
2000) (citing Cabrera v. Horgas, No. 98-4231, 173 F.3d 863, *1 (10th Cir. April 23, 1999)).
Id. (quoting White v. Colorado, 157 F.3d 1226, 1233 (10th Cir. 1998)).
reviews the party’s financial affidavit and compares his or her monthly expenses with the
monthly income disclosed therein.3
Both the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and this Court has a liberal policy toward
permitting proceedings in forma pauperis.4 After careful review of Plaintiff’s financial
resources (ECF No. 3-1 sealed), and comparison of Plaintiff’s listed monthly income and
listed monthly expenses, the Court finds he is financially unable to pay the filing fee.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed Without
Prepayment of Fees (ECF No. 3) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff’s deadline for service of process is
extended up to and including May 31, 2021. Service of process shall be undertaken by the
clerk of court under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated at Wichita, Kansas this 31st day of March 2021.
s/ Gwynne E. Birzer
GWYNNE E. BIRZER
United States Magistrate Judge
Alexander v. Wichita Hous. Auth., No. 07-1149-JTM, 2007 WL 2316902, *1 (D. Kan. Aug. 9,
2007) (citing Patillo v. N. Am. Van Lines, Inc., No. 02-2162-JWL, 2000 WL 1162684, *1) (D.
Kan. April. 15, 2002) and Webb v. Cessna Aircraft, No. 00-2229-JWL, 2000 WL 1025575, *1 (D.
Kan. July 17, 2000)).
Mitchell v. Deseret Health Care Facility, No. 13-1360-RDR, 2013 WL 5797609, *1 (D. Kan.
Sept. 30, 2013) (citing, generally, Yellen v. Cooper, 828 F.2d 1471 (10th Cir. 1987)).
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?