Addision v. Donahoe

Filing 13

ORDER ADOPTING 8 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Laura K Addision. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 3) is denied. The Clerk is directed to refer this action back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 9/3/2014. (abuc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Laura K. Addison,

C/A No. 3:14-1732-JFA-SVH
Plaintiff,

vs.

ORDER

Patrick R. Donahue, Postmaster General;
and United States,
Defendants.

The pro se plaintiff, Laura K. Addison, brings this action alleging that she was
illegally removed from her job and that her employer failed to provide back pay upon her
reinstatement. She has filed an application to proceed in this court without prepaying fees
or costs.
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 has prepared a Report and
Recommendation and opines that the plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis should
be denied. The Report sets forth in detail the relevant facts and standards of law on this
matter, and the court incorporates such without a recitation.
The plaintiff was advised of her right to file objections to the Report and

1

The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule
73.02. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no
presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. Mathews
v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions
of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and the court may accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, or recommit the matter to the
Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

1

Recommendation and she filed timely objections thereto. The court will address the
objections herein.
As the Magistrate Judge properly notes, this court has discretion to grant or deny an
application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); Dillard v.
Liberty Loan Corp., 626 F.2d 363, 364 (4th Cir. 1980). The Magistrate Judge has carefully
reviewed the matter under Carter v. Telectron, Inc., 452 F. Supp. 939 (S.D. Tex. 1976) and
finds that by paying the $450 filing fee, the plaintiff would not be rendered destitute, nor
would an undue hardship be imposed or block plaintiff’s access to the court.
In her objections to the Report, plaintiff contends that her litigation was commenced
due to financial hardship brought about by the defendant’s alleged illegal actions in this case.
Plaintiff also indicates that she has now become aware of additional federal and state taxes
she must pay as a result of withdrawals from her retirement account. Plaintiff notes that she
is not necessarily destitute, however, she avers that her financial obligations are very
important and she has managed to keep herself from being completely destitute.
A review of the plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis reveals that she
nets $4,000 or more each month; has approximately $2,300 per month in expenses; has
$1,500 in a savings account; and owes $400 in consumer debt. In her objections, plaintiff
indicates that she has a retirement account which she has withdrawn from to pay state and
federal taxes. Notably, plaintiff’s retirement account is not listed as an asset on her
application to proceed in forma pauperis.

2

After carefully reviewing the applicable laws, the record in this case, the Report and
Recommendation, and the objections thereto, this court adopts and incorporates the Report
herein by reference.

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis

(ECF No. 3) is respectfully denied.
The Clerk is directed to refer this action back to the Magistrate Judge for further
proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

September 3, 2014
Columbia, South Carolina

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

3