The opinion
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
JAMIE SUE FORD, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 4:23-CV-1337 SPM
)
BOARD OF HEALING ARTS, )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon self-represented plaintiff Jamie Sue Ford’s application
to proceed in district court without prepaying fees or costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. ECF No.
2. Because plaintiff has not provided any financial information, the Court is unable to determine
if she is able to pay the $402 filing fee at this time. Therefore, the Court will direct plaintiff to
submit an amended application. If plaintiff fails to timely comply, the Court will deny her motion
to proceed in forma pauperis.
“According to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, this Court may authorize commencement of a suit without
prepayment of fees by a person who, in good faith, files an affidavit stating that he or she is unable
to pay the costs of the lawsuit.” Andrews v. Nicholson, 2005 WL 2403449, at *1 (W.D. Mo. Sept.
28, 2005) (citing Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989)). The Court follows a two-step process
in considering whether the applicant should be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Id. First,
the Court must determine whether the applicant qualifies by economic status; second, the court
must determine whether under § 1915(e) the action or appeal is frivolous or malicious, fails to
state a claim on which relief may be granted or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is
immune from such relief. Id.
“The opportunity to proceed in forma pauperis is a privilege rather than a right, and should
not be used to abuse the Court’s process.” Broulette v. Spencer, 2005 WL 1009577, *1 (W.D. Mo.
a request to proceed in forma pauperis, the court will compare an applicant’s monthly income and
cash on hand to her monthly expenses and financial obligations.” Bey v. Kelly, 2021 WL 4713416,
at *1 (D. Kan. Sept. 8, 2021). Determining whether an applicant is sufficiently impoverished to
qualify under § 1915 rests within the sound discretion of the trial court. Cross v. General Motors
Corp., 721 F.2d 1152, 1157 (8th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 980 (1984). Such showing of
poverty is sufficient if the applicant would become completely destitute or be forced to give up the
basic necessities of life if required to pay the costs of the lawsuit. Adkins v. E.I. Du Pont De
Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948).
Here, plaintiff submitted a blank affidavit of financial status. See ECF No. 2. Although she
signed the form, she did not provide any information regarding her income for the past twelve
months; the amount of money she has on hand in a checking or savings account; or whether she
has any assets, such as a car or real estate. She has also failed to provide information regarding her
monthly expenses and debts.
Due to plaintiff’s self-represented status and her attestation that she is in poverty, the Court
will permit her the opportunity to file a completed application so the Court may determine whether
she meets the economic requirements for in forma pauperis status. The form must be completed
in full. Failure to timely comply will result in the Court’s denial of her request to proceed in district
court without prepaying fees or costs.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to mail to plaintiff a copy
of the Court’s form Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff must either pay the $402 filing fee or submit
the completed Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs, in
accordance with the instructions set forth herein, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this
Order.
— MO AO
SHIRLEY PADMORE MENSAH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Dated this 25th day of October, 2023.
-3-