Boyle v. Great Northern Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 17 September 1894
• Citation: 63 F. 539
• Parties: BOYLE v. GREAT NORTHERN RY. CO. et al.
• Court: United States Circuit Court, District of Washington

63 F. 539

BOYLE v. GREAT NORTHERN RY. CO. et al.

United States Circuit Court, D. Washington.

September 17, 1894

W. H Plummer, for plaintiff.

Jay H Adams, for defendants.

HANFORD, District Judge (orally).

By an act of congress approved July 20, 1892, any citizen of the United States entitled to commence any suit or action in any court of the United States who is unable, by reason of poverty, to prepay fees or give security for costs, may have process and all the rights of other litigants, and may have counsel assigned to represent him, free of charge, by making a sworn statement in writing showing the above facts, and that he believes himself to be entitled to redress by such suit or action. 27 Stat. 252, c. 209. I consider the affidavit upon which the plaintiff asks for leave to prosecute this action as a poor person insufficient, for two reasons: First, it does not show that the plaintiff is a citizen of the United States; and, secondly, it does not controvert the defendant's charge that plaintiff's attorneys have undertaken to conduct the case for a contingent fee. There is no question but what a poor person can prosecute his cause and obtain a full hearing, but at the same time litigation is not to be fostered and encouraged by allowing the plaintiff to evade any expense which he makes. That is a duty of any party having sufficient means, and is not to be evaded. If he is not able to pay costs or give security for them, he can have justice without it. But a person who acquires by contract an interest in any litigation, and a right to share in the fruits of a recovery and who is not entitled to sue in forma pauperis, cannot be permitted, under cover of the name of a party who is a poor person, to use judicial process and litigate at the expense of other people. I think it does make a difference whether the plaintiff has made a contract with his counsel for their compensation. It makes this difference: that, after a contract has been made with counsel for a pecuniary interest in a lawsuit, the case is carried on partially for their benefit; and, if they are able to pay the expenses of the litigation, it is unjust for the court to allow the litigation to go on for their benefit without expense, on the pretense that the plaintiff is unable to pay. I shall require a showing that the plaintiff is unable to pay or secure the costs, and that there is no person interested, by contract or otherwise, in...