Woodard v. Texas Southern University

Filing 28

ORDER entered DENYING 26 MOTION/APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Although this court has certified that the appeal is not taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3)(A), Woodard may challenge this f inding under Baugh v. Taylor by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the Clerk of Court,United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, within 30 days of this order. Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202.(Signed by Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
EUGENIA M. WOODARD,

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Plaintiff,
VS.
TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY,
Defendant.

CIVIL ACTION NO. H-13-0337

ORDER
Eugenia Woodard moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. (Docket Entry
No. 26). Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) states that leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis must
be denied if the district court determines that the appeal is not taken in “good faith,” that is, if the
appeal fails to present a nonfrivolous issue. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962);
United States v. Benitez, 405 F. App’x 930, 930 (5th Cir. 2010) (per curiam). An action is frivolous
when there is no arguable legal or factual basis for the claim. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325
(1989); United States v. Pineda–Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 630 (5th Cir. 2007). Similarly, under FED.
R. APP. P. 24(a)(3)(A), the appellant is ineligible for in forma pauperis status if the court certifies
that the appeal is not taken in “good faith.” If the district court finds no “legal points arguable on
their merits,” then an appeal is not taken in “good faith.” Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th
Cir. 1983); see also Wai Leung Chu v. United States, 353 F. App’x 952, 953 (5th Cir. 2009) (per
curiam); Groden v. Kizzia, 354 F. App’x 36, 36 (5th Cir. 2009) (per curiam); Walton v. Valdez, 340
F. App’x 954, 955 (5th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).

For the reasons stated in this court’s Order dismissing Woodard’s suit, (Docket Entry No.
17), this court certifies that Woodard’s appeal is not taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3);
FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(3)(A); see also Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 n.21 (5th Cir. 1997)
(explaining that to comply with Rule 24 and to inform the Court of Appeals of the reasons for its
certification, a district court may incorporate by reference its order dismissing an appellant’s
claims).
Although this court has certified that the appeal is not taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(3) and FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(3)(A), Woodard may challenge this finding under Baugh v.
Taylor by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the Clerk of Court,
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, within 30 days of this order. Baugh, 117 F.3d
at 202.
Woodard’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied.
SIGNED on July 11, 2013, at Houston, Texas.

______________________________________
Lee H. Rosenthal
United States District Judge

2