Emma Dunn and Alana Dunn v. Marclite Electrical Corporation Florida et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California recommends denying Alana Dunn’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court concludes that her reported household income, expenses, and assets are inconsistent with an inability to pay the filing fee, and that all plaintiffs in the action must establish eligibility to proceed without prepayment. The recommendation directs Emma Dunn and Alana Dunn to pay the $405 filing fee and permits objections within fourteen days.

Holdings

1. Alana Dunn's application did not establish that she was unable to pay the filing fee because the reported household income, expenses, and assets were inconsistent with a finding of poverty.
2. Where multiple plaintiffs proceed in a single action, they may not proceed in forma pauperis unless all named plaintiffs demonstrate inability to pay the filing fee.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Alana Dunn demonstrated that she was unable to pay the filing fee as required for in forma pauperis status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
2. Whether multiple plaintiffs may proceed in forma pauperis when one named plaintiff has not established inability to pay the filing fee.

Disposition

other