Johnson-Williams aka Cheryl Angrum v. Mortgage Electronic Registry Systems et al
Filing
32
ORDER: Considering the record in this case and the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's 30 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 3/22/2016) (ash)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
CHERYL JOHNSON-WILLIAMS, a/k/a
CHERYL ANGRUM,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITIMORTGAGE, INC.; MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRY SYSTEMS;
SHELLEY ORTOLANI, et al.
SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEES,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. 3:14-CV-3927-M
ORDER OF THE COURT ON RECOMMENDATION REGARDING
REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL
Considering the record in this case and the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the
Court hereby finds and orders:
( )
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is GRANTED.
(X)
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED for the
following reasons:
(X)
Plaintiff is not a pauper. A review of the financial information provided by
plaintiff shows a monthly income of $3,257.00 and monthly expenses of
approximately $2,263.00. Given this financial information showing monthly
income exceeding monthly expenses by $994.00, the Court concludes that
plaintiff will not suffer undue financial hardship after payment of the $505.00
filing fee. See Prows v. Kastner, 842 F.2d 138, 140 (5th Cir. 1988).
Although this Court has denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal,
plaintiff may challenge the denial by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma
pauperis on appeal with the Clerk of Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit, within thirty days after service of the notice required by Fed. R. App. P.
24(a)(4). See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).
SIGNED this 22nd day of March, 2016.
_________________________________
BARBARA M. G. LYNN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
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?