Melvin Spencer v. City of San Diego
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Todd W. Robinson (author)
Analysis
Plaintiff Melvin Spencer filed a complaint against the City of San Diego and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). The court denied the IFP motion without prejudice because the plaintiff's affidavit showed a monthly income surplus of approximately $750, failing to demonstrate that paying the filing fee would prevent him from affording the necessities of life.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (IFP) denied without prejudice“The Court therefore DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's IFP Motion (ECF No. 2).” | agree with court The court applied the standard from Escobedo v. Applebees, requiring the plaintiff to demonstrate that paying fees would result in an inability to afford the necessities of life. The order recites that the plaintiff earns $900/month and spends $150/month, leaving a $750 surplus. Under the cited authority, this surplus indicates the plaintiff is not destitute and can pay the $405 fee without hardship. The denial is without prejudice, allowing the plaintiff to renew the motion with better accounting or pay the fee. This follows the law and the recited facts. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly identifies the statutory basis for the fee and the standard for IFP relief. It applies the specific facts from the plaintiff's affidavit (income vs. expenses) to the legal standard cited in Escobedo. The reasoning is direct and the conclusion follows logically from the recited record. There are no significant gaps or misapplications of law.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MELVIN SPENCER, Case No.: 26-CV-4189 TWR (DEB)
12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 14 CITY OF SAN DIEGO, 15 Defendant. (ECF No. 2) 16 17 Presently before the Court are Plaintiff Melvin Spencer’s Complaint (“Compl.,” 18 ECF No. 1) and Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs 19 (“IFP Mot.,” ECF No. 2). All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a 20 district court of the United States, except an application for a writ of habeas corpus, must 21 pay filing and administration fees totaling $405.1 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). A court may, 22 however, in its discretion, allow a plaintiff to proceed without paying these fees if the 23 plaintiff seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) by submitting an affidavit 24 demonstrating the fees impose financial hardship. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); Escobedo v. 25 26 1 In addition to the $350 statutory fee, civil litigants must pay an additional administrative fee of 27 $55. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2023)). The additional $55 administrative fee does not apply to persons granted leave 28 1 || Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (2015). Although the statute does not specify the 2 || qualifications for proceeding IFP, the plaintiffs affidavit must allege poverty with some 3 || particularity. Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1234. Granting a plaintiff leave to proceed IFP may 4 proper, for example, when the affidavit demonstrates that paying court costs will result 5 || in a plaintiff's inability to afford the “necessities of life.” Jd. The affidavit, however, need 6 demonstrate that the plaintiff is destitute. Jd. 7 Here, Plaintiffs affidavit indicates that he has received an average of $900 per 8 ||month for his employment with the Salvation Army, (see IFP Mot. at 1—2) and that his 9 ||monthly expenditures total approximately $150, (see id. at 4-5). Because it appears that 10 || Plaintiff's income exceeds his expenses by approximately $750 per month, Plaintiff has 11 |/not demonstrated that paying the $405 filing fee will result in his inability to afford the 12 |/necessities of life. The Court therefore DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's 13 || IFP Motion (ECF No. 2). Should Plaintiff wish to proceed, within twenty-eight (28) days 14 || of the date of this Order, he must either (1) file a renewed motion to proceed IFP that more 15 ||/fully accounts for his monthly expenses, or (2) pay the entire $405 civil filing and 16 ||administrative fee in full. Should Plaintiff fail timely to file a renewed motion to proceed 17 || IFP or pay the $405 filing fee, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 || Dated: August 31, 2026 —— 20 [on (3, (re 21 Honorable Todd W. Robinson United States District Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28