Phillips v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Roger T. Benitez (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed Plaintiff Jennifer N. Phillips's application to proceed in forma pauperis in a Social Security case. The court denied the application because the plaintiff's affidavit failed to demonstrate that paying the filing fee would prevent her from providing for the necessities of life.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis Denied“Accordingly, the IFP Application is DENIED.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the standard from Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. and United States v. McQuade. The plaintiff reported a monthly income of approximately $5,088.45 and expenses of $2,717.22, resulting in a monthly surplus of over $2,300. The plaintiff provided no specific explanation for why a one-time filing fee would cause financial hardship or prevent her from meeting the necessities of life. Given the substantial monthly surplus and the lack of particularity in the affidavit, the denial is supported by the record and the cited law. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally correct and applies the appropriate legal standards for IFP applications. It cites the relevant statute and controlling case law (McQuade and Adkins). The factual findings regarding the plaintiff's income and expenses are sufficient to support the conclusion that the affidavit lacked the required particularity and did not demonstrate an inability to meet the necessities of life. There are no significant gaps in the reasoning.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 Jennifer N. Phillips, ) Case No.: 25-CV-0952-BEN-KSC ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER DENYING APPLICATION 13 v. ) TO PROCEED IN FORMA ) PAUPERIS 14 Commissioner of Social Security, ) 15 Defendant. ) 16 Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP Application”) is before 17 the Court Doc. No. 2. A court may authorize the commencement of a suit without 18 prepayment of fees if the plaintiff submits an affidavit, including a statement of all his or 19 her assets, showing that he or she is unable to pay the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 20 The affidavit must “state the facts as to [the] affiant’s poverty with some particularity, 21 definiteness and certainty.” United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981) 22 (quotations omitted). A party need not be completely destitute to proceed in forma 23 pauperis. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339–340 (1948). An 24 affidavit is sufficient if it shows that the applicant cannot pay the fee, “and still be able to 25 provide himself or herself and dependents with the necessities of life.” Id. (quotations 26 omitted). 27 Here, Plaintiff’s IFP Application states she has about $5,088.45 per month in 28 income, and about $2,717.22 per month in expenses Doc. No. 2. Plaintiff expects no change 1 || to her income in the next twelve months. Jd. She states only that it “would cause a financial 2 hardship” to pay the filing fee without providing any explanation of how or why that might 3 ||be the case. Id. The Court cannot conclude, based on this information, that plaintiff is 4 |/unable to afford the necessities of life after making a one-time case filing payment. 5 || Accordingly, the IFP Application is DENIED. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. lyin, 8] DATED: June 2, 2025 9 HON. ROGER T. BENITEZ 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2.