From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Epson v. Astrue

United States District Court, D. Kansas
Aug 29, 2008
No. 08-2349-CM (D. Kan. Aug. 29, 2008)

Summary

denying IFP where plaintiff's "monthly net income including Social Security benefits exceeds her monthly expenses by $492.55, . . . plaintiff has $29,499.00 equity in her house, and . . . owns a ten-year-old automobile of unknown value which is unencumbered by debt"

Summary of this case from Ficken v. Golden

Opinion

No. 08-2349-CM.

August 29, 2008


ORDER


On July 30, 2008, Plaintiff Rhonda Epson filed a Motion for Leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) in the above related case. United States Magistrate Judge John Thomas Reid issued a Report and Recommendation regarding Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 4). Plaintiff then filed a document entitled "Plaintiff's Response to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation." (Doc. 5). Although docketed as an "Objection to Report and Recommendation," (Doc. 5), plaintiff's filing (Doc. 5) is a stipulation to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation rather than an objection. Plaintiff "stipulates that she should and shall pay the court cost deposit." (Doc. 5).

The court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Reid. Based upon that review and the fact Plaintiff's objection is a stipulation to the Report and Recommendation, the court adopts the Report and Recommendation and ORDERS that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED (Doc. 2).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff pay any fees or costs in the above related action.


Summaries of

Epson v. Astrue

United States District Court, D. Kansas
Aug 29, 2008
No. 08-2349-CM (D. Kan. Aug. 29, 2008)

denying IFP where plaintiff's "monthly net income including Social Security benefits exceeds her monthly expenses by $492.55, . . . plaintiff has $29,499.00 equity in her house, and . . . owns a ten-year-old automobile of unknown value which is unencumbered by debt"

Summary of this case from Ficken v. Golden

affirming a report and recommendation that recommended denying in forma pauperis status where the plaintiff's affidavit demonstrated a positive monthly income, equity in a house, and car ownership unencumbered by debt despite “little cash on hand”

Summary of this case from Otudeko v. Topeka Pub. Schs., USD-501
Case details for

Epson v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:RHONDA J. EPSON, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, D. Kansas

Date published: Aug 29, 2008

Citations

No. 08-2349-CM (D. Kan. Aug. 29, 2008)

Citing Cases

Otudeko v. Topeka Pub. Schs., USD-501

See, e.g., Epson v. Astrue, No. 08-2349-CM, 2008 WL 4083013, at *1 (D. Kan. Aug. 29, 2008) (affirming a…

Ficken v. Golden

In addition, Ficken represents that he must pay a special assessment to the City of Eau Claire for street and…