Magdalera v. O'Malley

Filing 6

ORDER denying 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Payment of filing fees due 8/19/2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 7/3/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MAM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8 ANDREA L. M., Plaintiff(s), 9 10 v. 11 MARTIN O’MALLEY, 12 13 Case No. 2:24-cv-01052-NJK Order [Docket No. 1] Defendant(s). Plaintiff has requested authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. 14 Docket No. 1. 15 The Court may authorize the commencement of an action without prepayment of fees and 16 costs or security therefor, by a person who has shown that she is unable to pay such costs. 28 17 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). A determination of whether the plaintiff has shown an inability to pay is a 18 matter left to the discretion of the court. See Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit II Men’s 19 Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 217-218 (1993). In exercising that discretion, the Court evaluates 20 the income and assets to which the plaintiff has access, including those of a spouse. See, e.g., 21 Flores v. Colvin, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93236, at *3-4 (D. Nev. May 22, 2014). While an 22 applicant need not be totally destitute to qualify for in forma pauperis status, she must demonstrate 23 that she cannot pay those costs while still providing for the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. 24 DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948). 25 The application in this case identifies income of $3,520 per month from Plaintiff’s spouse, 26 Docket No. 1 at 1, which significantly exceeds the federal poverty guidelines for a family of three, 27 cf. Flores, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93236, at *5 (comparing income to poverty guidelines). That 28 monthly income is also well above the amounts that have led to denial of in forma pauperis status. 1 1 See, e.g., Brunson v. Soc. Sec., 2019 WL 6709544, at *1 (D. Nev. Oct. 31, 2019) (denying in forma 2 pauperis status based on monthly income of $1,397), adopted, 2019 WL 6700193 (D. Nev. Dec. 3 9, 2019). Moreover, while the application indicates that the household’s monthly expenses exceed 4 income, the application provides exorbitant monthly expenses for utilities ($900) and appears to 5 identify health costs twice ($240 provided twice). At bottom, a financial picture has not been 6 painted that a family of three with a monthly household income of $3,520 cannot afford to pay the 7 $405 filing fee. 8 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Plaintiff 9 must pay the filing fee by August 19, 2024. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 Dated: July 3, 2024 ______________________________ Nancy J. Koppe United States Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?