Opinion
2:15-cv-00404-JAD-CWH
11-06-2015
Anya S. Duke, Plaintiff v. Esq. Mary-Anne Miller, et al., Defendants
Order Denying Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis [ECF 6], Adopting Report and Recommendation [ECF 8], Overruling Objections [ECF 9], and Denying Motion for Status Check [ECF 9]
Pro se plaintiff Anya S. Duke sues defendants for injuries she allegedly sustained while litigating in Clark County District Court when a courtroom door struck her in the face. This is Duke's third in forma pauperis request. Magistrate Judge Hoffman denied Duke's first two requests without prejudice as incomplete. Finding that Duke's latest application contains sufficient information to make a recommendation, Judge Hoffman recommends that I deny it. Duke objects. She submits a new calculation of monthly expenses that now exceeds her monthly income by $190. Duke's new expenditures include things like $190 per month for internet and cable, $120 per month for "Laundry/cleaning alternatives," and $40 per month for charitable contributions. Having reviewed Judge Hoffman's findings and conclusions de novo, I adopt his report and recommendation, deny Duke's application, and overrule her objections.
ECF 1-1.
ECF 1, 3, 6.
ECF 2, 5.
ECF 8.
ECF 9 at 3.
Discussion
To prevail on a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, a plaintiff need not show that she is completely destitute; she must show that, because of her poverty, she cannot pay the filing fee and still provide herself and her dependents with the "necessities of life." A "showing of something more than mere hardship must be made." The benefits and other assets listed by Duke total $4,807.00. That is well above the median household income in this state, and she has no dependents. I therefore agree with Judge Hoffman that Duke has not shown a financial inability to pay the filing fee, even with the new information attached to her objections. Other courts have denied applications with a much greater showing of financial hardship than shown here.
Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948).
Martin v. Gulf States Utilities Co., 221 F. Supp 757, 759 (W.D. La. 1963).
< http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/32000.html > (Median household income in Nevada 2009-2013 $52,800).
See e.g., Crawford v. Kern Cnty. School Dist. Bd. of Trustees, 2010 WL 1980246, *2 (C.D. Cal. 2010) (denying application on showing that family of five had an annual income of over $51,000); Matter of Anderson, 130 B.R. 497, 500 (W.D. Mich. 1991) (denying application when plaintiff earned $950 per month and poverty level in Michigan was $6,520 per year). --------
Conclusion
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Status Check [ECF 10] is DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's objections [ECF 9] are OVERRULED and Magistrate Judge Hoffman's Report and Recommendation [ECF 8] is ACCEPTED and his findings and conclusions are ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis [ECF 6] is DENIED. Plaintiff must pay the $400 filing fee by December 7, 2015, or this case will be dismissed without prejudice. Dated this 6th day of November, 2015
/s/_________
Jennifer A. Dorsey
United States District Judge