Tripati v. First Nat. Bank & Trust, No. 86-3674
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before ALARCON, BEEZER and WIGGINS; ALARCON |
| Citation | 821 F.2d 1368 |
| Parties | RICO Bus.Disp.Guide 6682 Anant Kumar TRIPATI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK & TRUST, et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Docket Number | No. 86-3674 |
| Decision Date | 10 March 1987 |
Page 1368
v.
FIRST NATIONAL BANK & TRUST, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Ninth Circuit.
Decided July 10, 1987.
Page 1369
Anant Kumar Tripati, San Pedro, Cal., pro se.
Thomas Towe, Billings, Mont., for defendant-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana--Billings Division.
Before ALARCON, BEEZER and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges.
ALARCON, Circuit Judge:
Anant Kumar Tripati (hereinafter Tripati) appeals from the denial of his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Tripati sought to file an action against First National Bank & Trust (hereinafter Bank) and his former attorney, Chester L. Brown (hereinafter Brown) for fraud and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (hereinafter RICO). Tripati filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The district court denied the motion, and reasoned that Tripati (1) "is attempting to relitigate matters which have been resolved against him in First National Bank & Trust v. Fort Lincoln Life Insurance Co., CV-83-192-BLG[,] ... [ (2) p]laintiff's complaint is of dubious merit and plaintiff has shown no exceptional circumstances which convince the Court" that the motion should be granted. Tripati contends that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion. We disagree.
I.
"The denial by a District Judge of a motion to proceed in forma pauperis is an appealable order." Roberts v. United States District Court, 339 U.S. 844, 845, 70 S.Ct. 954, 955, 94 L.Ed. 1326 (1950); Lipscomb v. United States, 301 F.2d 905, 905 (9th Cir.1962) (per curiam). We review the district court's denial of leave to proceed in forma pauperis in civil cases for abuse of discretion. Venable v. Meyers, 500 F.2d 1215, 1216 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1090, 95 S.Ct. 683, 42 L.Ed.2d 683 (1974). We review de novo the district court's apparent determination that Tripati's complaint lacked arguable substance in law or fact. Rizzo v. Dawson, 778 F.2d 527, 530 (9th Cir.1985).
II.
Tripati contends the district court erred in denying his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis because his complaint does state a claim and is not frivolous. We disagree.
Under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(a) (1982 & Supp. III 1985), the district court "may authorize the commencement ... [or] prosecution ... of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Horak, Nos. 86-1473
...suggested several factors that should affect an analysis embodying what are admittedly "fluid concepts." Id.; see also Littlefield, 821 F.2d at 1368. The Busher case would seem to construe section (a)(2) to require forfeiture of a defendant's entire interest in the enterprise except where t......
-
Hernandez v. Denton, Nos. 86-2139
...bare legal conclusions without any supporting facts. Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1228. See Page 1426 Tripati v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Second, a court may dismiss if the plaintiff's claims are redundant or barred by res judicata because of previous litigation. Tripati,......
-
Bourn v. California, No. 2:16-cv-2110 KJM DB PS
...or without merit.'" Minetti v. Port of Seattle, 152 F.3d 1113, 1115 (9th Cir. 1998) (quoting Tripati v. First Nat. Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Cir. 1987)); see also McGee v. Department of Child Support Services, 584 Fed. Appx. 638 (9th Cir. 2014) ("the district court did not abus......
-
Lee v. Ehlenbach, Case No.: 1:18-cv-0247 - DAD - JLT
...from the face of the proposed complaint that thePage 4 action is frivolous or without merit"); Tripati v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1369 (9th Cir. 1987) (same).III. Screening Requirement When an individual seeks to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court is required to review th......
-
U.S. v. Horak, Nos. 86-1473
...suggested several factors that should affect an analysis embodying what are admittedly "fluid concepts." Id.; see also Littlefield, 821 F.2d at 1368. The Busher case would seem to construe section (a)(2) to require forfeiture of a defendant's entire interest in the enterprise except where t......
-
Hernandez v. Denton, Nos. 86-2139
...bare legal conclusions without any supporting facts. Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1228. See Page 1426 Tripati v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Second, a court may dismiss if the plaintiff's claims are redundant or barred by res judicata because of previous litigation. Tripati,......
-
Bourn v. California, No. 2:16-cv-2110 KJM DB PS
...or without merit.'" Minetti v. Port of Seattle, 152 F.3d 1113, 1115 (9th Cir. 1998) (quoting Tripati v. First Nat. Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Cir. 1987)); see also McGee v. Department of Child Support Services, 584 Fed. Appx. 638 (9th Cir. 2014) ("the district court did not abus......
-
Lee v. Ehlenbach, Case No.: 1:18-cv-0247 - DAD - JLT
...from the face of the proposed complaint that thePage 4 action is frivolous or without merit"); Tripati v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1369 (9th Cir. 1987) (same).III. Screening Requirement When an individual seeks to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court is required to review th......