Cotton v. Colvin

Filing 4

ORDER signed by Judge Pamela Pepper on 12/6/2016 GRANTING 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed Without Prepayment of the Filing Fee. (cc: all counsel) (pwm)

UNITEDSTATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
______________________________________________________________________________
VERONICA T. COTTON,

Case No. 16-cv-1548-pp

Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of the
Social Security Administration,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (DKT. NO. 2)
______________________________________________________________________________
The plaintiff has filed a complaint requesting that the court review the
Commissioner’s denial of her Social Security Disability Insurance claims. Dkt.
No. 1. Along with the complaint, the plaintiff filed an affidavit in support of her
request that the court allow her to proceed with the case without paying the
filing fee. Dkt. No. 2. In order to allow a plaintiff to proceed without paying the
filing fee, the court must first decide whether the plaintiff has the ability to pay
the filing fee, and if not, must determine whether the lawsuit is frivolous. 28
U.S.C. §§1915(a) and (e)(2)(B)(i).
In the affidavit, the plaintiff indicates that she receives $608 per month
in W-2 assistance, $221 in child support, and $605 in food share benefits, for a
total monthly income of $1,434. Id. at 5. She is not married, but supports three
minor children. Id. at 2. The plaintiff indicates that she has monthly expenses
totaling $940, consisting of $800 for rent and $140 for utilities. Id. at 4. The
1

$605 in food share benefits all goes toward food for her family, and she relies
on local food pantries to supplement their needs. Id. 5. The plaintiff states that
she applies for energy assistance during the heating season each year because
she is behind on utility payments. Id. The affidavit also states that the plaintiff
has $5 in a checking account. Id. at 3. Thus, the plaintiff has a gross income of
$1,434 per month and expenses of $1,545. The court concludes from this
information that the plaintiff has demonstrated that she cannot pay the $350
filing fee and $50 administrative fee.
The next step is to determine whether the case is frivolous. A case is
frivolous if there is no arguable basis for relief either in law or in fact. Denton v.
Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992) (quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319,
325 (1989); Casteel v. Pieschek, 3 F.3d 1050, 1056 (7th Cir. 1993)). A person
may obtain district court review of a final decision of the Commissioner of
Social Security. 42 U.S.C. §405(g). The district court must uphold the
Commissioner’s final decision as long as the Commissioner used the correct
legal standards and the decision is supported by substantial evidence. See
Roddy v. Astrue, 705 F.3d 631, 636 (7th Cir. 2013).
In her complaint, the plaintiff asserts that the ALJ’s decision is not
supported by substantial evidence and is contrary to law. The court finds that
the plaintiff has stated a claim that the Commissioner’s decision denying the
plaintiff’s application for benefits is not supported by substantial evidence, or is
contrary to law and regulation. At this early stage in the case, the court
concludes that there may be a basis in law or fact for the plaintiff’s appeal of
2

the Commissioner’s decision, and that the appeal may have merit, as defined
by 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
The court ORDERS that the plaintiff’s motion for leave to appeal in forma
pauperis (Dkt. No. 2) is GRANTED.
Dated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 6th day of December, 2016.

3