Darryl Cox v. Cresco Capital, Inc.; et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Nevada denies Darryl Cox’s application to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice because the application omits financial information and contains contradictory answers. The Court grants Cox 30 days to submit a complete application or pay the filing fee and directs the Clerk to provide the applicable long-form application.

Holdings

1. An applicant seeking in forma pauperis status must provide a complete and sufficiently particular financial affidavit, including personal assets, income sources and amounts, employment information, and applicable expenses; the applicant may not leave questions blank or provide zero or not-applicable answers without explanation.
2. The application must be denied without prejudice because the court could not determine from the incomplete and contradictory application whether Cox qualified for in forma pauperis status.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Cox's financial affidavit adequately demonstrated that he was unable to pay the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
2. Whether the court should deny the in forma pauperis application when it omitted required financial information and contained contradictory answers.

Disposition

other