Opinion
3:23-cv-1018 (VAB)
08-26-2024
MARIA ALICEA, Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH GANIM, Defendant.
RULING AND ORDER
VICTOR A. BOLDEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Maria Alicea (“Plaintiff” or “Ms. Alicea”) moves the court for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
For the reasons set forth below, Ms. Alicea's motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED without prejudice.
Under Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, a party who wishes to appeal an adverse ruling and who has not previously been granted in forma pauperis status must:
file a motion in the district courts [and] attach an affidavit that: (A) shows in the detail prescribed by Form 4 of the Appendix of Forms the party's inability to pay or to give security for fees and costs; (B) claims an entitlement to redress; and (C) states the issues that the party intends to present on appeal.Fed. R. App. P. Rule 24(a)(1). See also 2d Cir. Local Rule 24.1.
Here, Ms. Alicea has submitted a district court in forma pauperis form, rather than an appellate Form 4 (see attached) as required under Rule 24(a)(1). Ms. Alicea's motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal does not contain her entitlement to redress nor does it contain the issues that she intends to present on appeal as required by the Rule, see Fed. R. App. P. Rule 24(a)(1)(B),(C), and thus her motion is deficient and shall be dismissed. See Beltran v. Murphy,
Docket No. 3:09CV1880 (JBA), 2010 WL 4738066, at *1 (D. Conn. Nov. 16, 2010); Santander Bank, N.A. v. Harrison, No. 3:15-CV-1730(AVC), 2016 WL 11671652, at *1 (D. Conn. Aug. 2, 2016).
Accordingly, Ms. Alicea's Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, ECF No. 63 (Aug. 12, 2024) is DENIED without prejudice.
Ms. Alicea may refile her motion to proceed in forma pauperis in compliance with the affidavit requirements of Rule 24(a).
SO ORDERED.