Haro v. Kijakazi
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Daniel E. Butcher (author)
Analysis
Plaintiff Albert H. filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis in a Social Security action. The court granted the application, finding that the plaintiff demonstrated an inability to pay the filing fee while maintaining the necessities of life.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis Granted“Accordingly, Plaintiff's Application to Proceed with his Complaint in forma pauperis is GRANTED.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the statutory standard of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) and the controlling precedent from the Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court. The plaintiff's affidavit detailed specific financial figures (income, expenses, assets) showing that paying the filing fee would prevent him from providing for himself and his dependents. The decision follows directly from the facts recited in the order. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally correct and legally sound. It cites the relevant statute and binding precedent from the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court. The court explicitly connects the plaintiff's specific financial data (income, expenses, assets) to the legal standard of 'necessities of life,' providing a clear rationale for the grant.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALBERT H., Case No.: 21-cv-783-DEB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION 13 v. TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 14 ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, 15 [DKT. NO. 2] Defendant. 16 17 Before the Court is Plaintiff Albert H.’s Application to Proceed with his Complaint 18 in forma pauperis. Dkt. No. 2. A court may authorize the commencement of a suit without 19 prepayment of fees if the plaintiff submits an affidavit, including a statement of all his 20 assets, showing he is unable to pay the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The affidavit 21 must “state the facts as to [the] affiant’s poverty with some particularity, definiteness and 22 certainty.” United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981). An affidavit is 23 sufficient if it shows the applicant cannot pay the fee “and still be able to provide himself 24 and dependents with the necessities of life.” Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit II 25 Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 203 (1993) (internal quotations omitted). 26 Here, Plaintiff’s application states he is unemployed, has limited assets, and a 27 $519.00 average monthly income. Dkt. No. 2 at 2. Plaintiff relies on public assistance in 28 1 ||the form of food stamps and welfare to cover his expenses and support his two minor 2 || daughters. Jd. at 2, 3. Plaintiffs only assets are a checking account, with a $30.87 balance, 3 || and a 2000 Jeep valued at $1,500. Jd. at 2-3. Plaintiff's monthly expenses average $467.00 4 include utilities, food, transportation, and “alimony, maintenance, and support paid to 5 || others.” Jd. at 4-5. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds Plaintiff has sufficiently shown 6 ||he lacks the financial resources to pay his filing fee. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Application 7 ||to Proceed with his Complaint in forma pauperis is GRANTED. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 ||Dated: April 21, 2021 — ‘ Dok PT ll Honorable Daniel E. Butcher United States Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28