Summary
affirming the dismissal of a lawsuit against a judge as frivolous or malicious
Summary of this case from Kansas v. PriceOpinion
No. 09-3172.
February 18, 2010.
David Martin Price, Topeka, KS, pro se.
Before MURPHY, GORSUCH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res. judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed.R.App.P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
After examining appellant's brief and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
David Price filed suit against the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, and against Kathryn Vratil, in her official capacity as the Chief Judge of that court. In a comprehensive order, the district court denied Price's request to proceed in forma pauperis, concluding Price's suit was legally frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Accordingly, the district court dismissed the case without prejudice to the filing of a pre-paid complaint.
The case was assigned to Chief Judge Fernando Gaitan of the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Chief Judge Gaitan has been designated to sit in the District of Kansas when the need arises.
Price appeals and seeks permission to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. For all those reasons set out by the district court in its order dated May 21, 2009, this court concludes Price's appeal is frivolous or malicious. Accordingly, we hereby DISMISS this appeal and the request to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b)(i) (providing that "[n]otwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines . . . the . . . appeal is frivolous or malicious").