Williams v. Marshall, C-92-0994-VRW

Decision Date27 July 1992
Docket NumberNo. C-92-0994-VRW,C-92-1437-VRW.,C-92-0994-VRW
Citation795 F. Supp. 978
PartiesTyrone D. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. Warden MARSHALL, et al., Defendants. Tyrone D. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. James GOMEZ, et al., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of California

Tyrone D. Williams, pro se.

Morris Lenk, Deputy Atty. Gen., State of Cal., San Francisco, Cal., for defendants.

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS.

WALKER, District Judge.

Williams, an inmate at Pelican Bay State Prison, filed these two lawsuits challenging conditions of his confinement. In each, Williams has applied to proceed without prepayment of fees or costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

The benefit extended to litigants to proceed in forma pauperis under this statute is a privilege, not a right. Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1231 (9th Cir.1984); Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329, 332 (9th Cir.1968). It is well established that, to obtain this privilege, a litigant must demonstrate to the court's satisfaction the inability to prepay. "When a claim of poverty is made under section 1915, it is proper and indeed essential for the supporting affidavit to state facts as to the affiant's poverty with some particularity, definiteness and certainty." United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir.1981), citing Jefferson v. United States, 277 F.2d 723, 725 (9th Cir.1960).

Williams' initial affidavit in support of his in forma pauperis application merely stated that, as an inmate in state prison, he "simply can't pay." This is inadequate. On June 18, 1992, the court ordered Williams to supplement this affidavit with a certified copy of the record of his prison trust account, showing all deposits and withdrawals for the six months preceding the filing of the lawsuits.

Williams has now complied with the court's order. His supplemental affidavit indicates that, as an inmate in the Security Housing Unit, he has no income nor opportunity to work and thereby earn income. The affidavit includes a copy of his prison trust account statement, which indicates a current balance of $0.00 and little activity in the preceding four months. Both Williams' affidavit and the transmittal letter from the Department of Corrections Trust Office indicate that only four months of information are stored by the Trust Office. Therefore, although earlier records might be obtained from the Trust Office archives, the court excuses for cause shown Williams' failure to produce the full six months of records required by the June 18 order.

Williams'...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • White v. Regents of the Univ. of California
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • 22 Febrero 2012
    ...of proceeding in forma pauperis, Plaintiff must demonstrate his inability to pay the requisite fees and costs. Williams v. Marshall, 795 F. Supp. 978, 979 (N.D. Cal. 1992). A statement of poverty is sufficient if it demonstrates that the applicant cannot pay court costs and still be able to......
  • Goff v. Gamez
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • 17 Diciembre 2019
    ...1231 (9th Cir. 1984); Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329, 332 (9th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 891 (1968); Williams v. Marshall, 795 F.Supp. 978, 978-79 (N.D. Cal. 1992). A federal court may dismiss a claim filed in forma pauperis prior to service if it is satisfied that the action is f......
  • Gimel v. Busch, C 12-05806 RS
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • 4 Diciembre 2012
    ...of proceeding in forma pauperis, Gimel must demonstrate his inability to pay the requisite fees and costs. See Williams v. Marshall, 795 F. Supp. 978, 979 (N.D. Cal. 1992). A statement of poverty is sufficient if it demonstrates that the applicant cannot pay court costs and still be able to......
  • Villareal v. Seneca Mortg. Servicing, LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • 25 Marzo 2016
    ...1231 (9th Cir. 1984); Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329, 332 (9th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 891 (1968); Williams v. Marshall, 795 F.Supp. 978, 978-79 (N.D. Cal. 1992). A federal court may dismiss a claim filed in forma pauperis prior to service if it is satisfied that the action is f......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT