From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Toussaint v. All Points Realty

United States District Court, Southern District of California
Apr 26, 2022
22-cv-00496-LAB-JLB (S.D. Cal. Apr. 26, 2022)

Opinion

22-cv-00496-LAB-JLB

04-26-2022

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT, Plaintiff, v. ALL POINTS REALTY, Defendant.


ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE [DKT. 2]

HON. LARRY ALAN BURNS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff Fritz Gerald Toussaint filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Dkt. 2. Because the Motion gives an incomplete picture of Toussaint's finances, it is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) must establish that the litigant “cannot because of [his] poverty pay or give security for costs . . . and still be able to provide [him]self and dependents with the necessities of life.” Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948). Litigants must comply with this District's Local Rules governing IFP applications. See CivLR 3.2.

The District Court's website provides a form that would conform with the Local Rules if fully and accurately completed. It can be found at https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/assets/pdf/forms/Motion%20to%20Procee d%20In%20Forma%20Pauperis.pdf

The Motion is incomplete and contradictory, so the Court can't determine whether requiring Toussaint to pay filing fees would make him unable to provide for himself and his dependents. Toussaint appears to identify gross pay of $377 per month, but he doesn't clearly identify the source of that income. Under the “Other Income” category, he fails to state whether he has any business, profession, or other self-employment income or gift or inheritance income. In the same place, he checked “No” next to the “Any other [income] sources” item, but wrote in “patents” while neglecting to state what income (if any) he receives from patents. He acknowledges he has dependents, but he doesn't divulge their number or relationship to him. He states that he has expenses and outstanding liabilities, but he doesn't identify them. Toussaint's conflicting and incomplete statements fail to carry his burden to demonstrate that he is unable to pay the filing fee.

The Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Within 21 days of this Order , Toussaint must either (1) pay the entire $400 statutory and administrative filing fee, or (2) file a new IFP motion resolving the issues the Court identified. If Toussaint does neither, his complaint will be dismissed without prejudice and this case will be closed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Toussaint v. All Points Realty

United States District Court, Southern District of California
Apr 26, 2022
22-cv-00496-LAB-JLB (S.D. Cal. Apr. 26, 2022)
Case details for

Toussaint v. All Points Realty

Case Details

Full title:FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT, Plaintiff, v. ALL POINTS REALTY, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of California

Date published: Apr 26, 2022

Citations

22-cv-00496-LAB-JLB (S.D. Cal. Apr. 26, 2022)