Knowlin, Lee v. Gray, Dewayne et al
Filing
11
ORDER Construing Notice of Appeal as Request to Proceed ifp. Leave to proceed ifp denied. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 2/25/2013. (jef),(ps)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LEE KNOWLIN,
ORDER
Plaintiff,
12-cv-926-bbc
v.
DEWAYNE GRAY, ANGELA ALT,
JAMES PARISI, MARTHA STACKER
and MOLLY SULLIVAN OLSON,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - On February 13, 2013, I dismissed plaintiff Lee Knowlin’s complaint for failure to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal on February
25, 2013. Because plaintiff has not paid the $455 filing fee for filing an appeal, I will
construe his notice of appeal as a request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
A district court has authority to deny a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 for one or more of the following reasons: the litigant wishing to
take an appeal has not established indigence, the appeal is taken in bad faith or the litigant
is a prisoner and has three strikes. § 1915(a)(1),(3) and (g). Sperow v. Melvin, 153 F.3d
780, 781 (7th Cir. 1998). Plaintiff’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on
appeal will be denied, because I am certifying that his appeal is not taken in good faith.
In Lucien v. Roegner, 682 F.2d 625, 626 (7th Cir. 1982), the court of appeals
1
instructed district courts to find bad faith in cases in which a plaintiff is appealing the same
claims the court found to be without legal merit. Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025, 1027 (7th
Cir. 2000). Plaintiff is trying to appeal the same claims on which I denied him leave to
proceed. Because there is no legally meritorious basis for plaintiff’s appeal, I must certify
that the appeal is not taken in good faith.
Because I am certifying plaintiff’s appeal as not having been taken in good faith, he
cannot proceed with his appeal without prepaying the $455 filing fee unless the court of
appeals gives him permission to do so. Under Fed. R. App. P. 24, plaintiff has 30 days from
the date of this order in which to ask the court of appeals to review this court’s denial of
leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. With his motion, he must include an affidavit
as described in the first paragraph of Fed. R. App. P. 24(a), with a statement of issues he
intends to argue on appeal. Also, he must send along a copy of this order. Plaintiff should
be aware that he must file these documents in addition to the notice of appeal he has filed
previously.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Lee Knowlin’s request for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on appeal, dkt. #9, is DENIED. I certify that his appeal is not taken in good faith.
The clerk of court is directed to insure that plaintiff’s obligation to pay the $455 fee for
2
filing his appeal is reflected in the court’s financial records.
Entered this 25th day of February, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
BARBARA B. CRABB
District Judge
3
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?