-
USCA1 Opinion
May 22, 1995
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 95-1044
ORLANDO DIAZ-OJEDA,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
PEDRO TOLEDO, SUPERINTENDENT, THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO
POLICE DEPARTMENT, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. Salvador E. Casellas, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges. ______________
____________________
Orlando Diaz-Ojeda on brief pro se. __________________
Carlos Lugo Fiol, Acting Solicitor General, and Lorraine J. __________________ ____________
Riefkohl, Assistant Solicitor General, Department of Justice, on brief ________
for appellees.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. Plaintiff, Orlando Diaz-Ojeda, appeals __________
from the district court's denial of his motion to proceed in __
forma pauperis. See Roberts v. United States District Court, _____ ________ ___ _______ ____________________________
339 U.S. 844, 845 (1950) (holding that denial of motion to
proceed in forma pauperis is immediately appealable). We __ _____ ________
affirm.
Under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a), a court may authorize
the commencement of a law suit "without prepayment of fees
and costs or security therefor, by a person who makes
affidavit that he is unable to pay such costs or give
security therefor." A district court's determination of a
party's ability to pay such costs is a "determination that
will 'not be lightly overturned.'" United States v. Lyons, _____________ _____
898 F.2d 210, 216 (1st Cir. 1990) (citation omitted). See ___
also Cross v. General Motors Corp., 721 F.2d 1152, 1157 (8th ____ _____ ____________________
Cir. 1983) ("Under 28 U.S.C. 1915, the decision whether to
grant or deny in forma pauperis status is within the sound
discretion of the trial court").
We have carefully reviewed the record, including
plaintiff's affidavit accompanying his motion to proceed in __
forma pauperis, and the parties' briefs. The record reveals _____ ________
that plaintiff lives with his parents, pays no rent, has no
dependents and receives government unemployment payments.
Under these circumstances, we conclude that payment of the
$120 filing fee and other costs would not deprive plaintiff
of the "necessities of life." Adkins v. DuPont de Nemours & ______ ____________________
Co., Inc., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948). Therefore, the district _________
court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's
motion.
The district court's order of December 13, 1994,
denying plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis is __ _____ ________
affirmed. ________
-3-
Document Info
Docket Number: 95-1044
Filed Date: 5/22/1995
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 9/21/2015