SHUPER v. CHANDLER et al

Filing 75

ORDER ON MOTIONS TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS denying 61 and 73 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (lrc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
ALLA I. SHUPER,
Plaintiff,
v.
REBECCA CHANDLER, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:13-cv-110-GZS

ORDER ON MOTIONS TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
Before the Court are pro se Plaintiff Alla Shuper’s Motion To Leave To Appeal In Forma
Pauperis (IFP) (ECF No. 61) and Motion To Leave To Appeal (Third Appeal) In Forma Pauperis
(IFP) (ECF No. 73). Through Plaintiff Shuper’s Motions, she asks this Court to excuse her from
paying the docket fees in connection with her July 18, 2013 Notice of Appeal (ECF No. 60) and
her July 24, 2013 Notice of Appeal (ECF No. 69). The Court believes that both Plaintiff
Shuper’s July 18, 2013 Notice of Appeal and July 24, 2013 Notice of Appeal are premature and
improper given the procedural posture of Plaintiff Shuper’s claims against Defendants Rebecca
Chandler, Peter Lewis and John Desjardins; namely, Plaintiff is within the 90-day period for
finalizing a settlement with these Defendants. (See ECF Nos. 41 & 43.) As a result, the Court
concludes that the present appeals are not taken in good faith as required under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(3) & F.R.A.P. 24(a)(2) & (4). For this reason, the Court DENIES the Motion To
Leave To Appeal In Forma Pauperis (IFP) (ECF No. 61) and DENIES the Motion To Leave To
Appeal (Third Appeal) In Forma Pauperis (IFP) (ECF No. 73). These denials are without
prejudice to Plaintiff Shuper filing a renewed request to proceed in forma pauperis if or when a

stipulation of dismissal or other final order is entered. Any such request shall include an updated
financial affidavit detailing Plaintiff Shuper’s current income and expenses.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ George Z. Singal
United States District Judge

Dated this 26th day of July, 2013.

2