Summary
The Arkansas Supreme Court remanded Howard T. Wood’s appeal concerning the denial of his petition to proceed in forma pauperis. The court held that the circuit court was required under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 72(c) to make findings regarding indigency and, if applicable, whether the declaratory-judgment petition stated a colorable cause of action.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court was required to make specific findings concerning Wood's indigency and the existence of a colorable cause of action before denying his petition to proceed in forma pauperis.
- Whether the Supreme Court should remand for the findings required by Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 72(c) when no obvious procedural defect appears on the face of the petition.
Holdings
- Under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 72(c), the circuit court must make a specific finding of indigency based on the petitioner's affidavit and, if the petitioner is indigent, determine whether the alleged facts state a colorable cause of action. The circuit court's failure to make those findings requires remand unless the petition is facially incapable of proceeding as a matter of law.
Key quotations
“Rule 72(c) of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure mandates that the circuit court make a specific finding of indigency based on the petitioner’s affidavit.”
“Once the circuit court has ascertained that a petitioner is indigent, the circuit court must then determine if the facts alleged by the petitioner state a colorable cause of action.”
“Accordingly, we remand this case to the circuit court for entry of a supplemental order on the in forma pauperis petition that complies with Rule 72(c), to wit, findings on Wood’s indigency.”
Factual background
Howard T. Wood filed a pro se petition to proceed in forma pauperis so that he could pursue a declaratory-judgment action. His proposed action challenged as unconstitutionally vague and void an aggravating-factor provision in Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-90-804(c)(2)(B). The circuit court denied pauper status without findings explaining whether Wood was indigent or whether his petition stated a colorable cause of action.
Procedural history
Wood sought leave to proceed as a pauper so he could pursue a declaratory-judgment petition challenging language in Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-90-804(c)(2)(B) as unconstitutionally vague and void. The circuit court denied the in forma pauperis petition without making findings of fact regarding indigency or whether the petition stated a colorable cause of action. The Arkansas Supreme Court remanded for a supplemental order containing the findings required by Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 72(c), followed by a new briefing schedule.
Remand instructions
The circuit court must enter a supplemental order on the in forma pauperis petition containing findings on Wood's indigency. If Wood is found indigent, the circuit court must determine whether his petition states a colorable cause of action and memorialize that determination in the order. The supplemental record must be filed in the Supreme Court within thirty days of the opinion, after which the clerk must set a new briefing schedule allowing Wood to address the supplemental order.