Varner v. CPS/CCDFS ( 2024 )

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 Khari Varner, Tera Strawter, K.L.V, N.V., Case No. 2:24-cv-00341-RFB-DJA 6 K.V, J.V., 7 Plaintiffs, Order 8 v. 9 CPS/CCDFS, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 Before the Court are two of Plaintiff Khari Varner’s applications to proceed in forma 13 pauperis.1 (ECF Nos. 13, 14). However, although Varner has signed both applications, they 14 contain different information about Varner’s financial status. For example, in response to 15 question 3, Varner did not check the boxes for whether Varner receives money through gifts, 16 inheritances, or other sources on one application (ECF No. 13) but Varner checks the “no” boxes 17 for these items on the other (ECF No. 14). On one application, Varner claims to have $0 in a 18 checking account. (ECF No. 13). But in the other, Varner claims to have $50. (ECF No. 14). 19 Finally, on one application, Varner claims to have no financial obligations (ECF No. 13) and on 20 the other, Varner claims to owe $500 (ECF No. 14). 21 Additionally, Varner’s responses are not sufficiently descriptive. For example, Varner 22 claims to owe $500, but does not answer the remainder of question 8, which asks for a description 23 of the amounts owed and to whom they are payable. (ECF No. 14). The Court also takes judicial 24 notice of the fact that Varner filed a previous application to proceed in forma pauperis in another 25 case. See Varner et al. v. Strawter et al., No. 2:24-cv-00537-JAD-DJA, at ECF No. 3. In that 26 27 1 The caption of the application filed at ECF No. 13 is changed to only state Tera Strawter’s 1 application, Varner claimed to be self-employed, listed rent and utility payments, and claimed 2 that a minor child relied on Varner for support. Id. While the Court recognizes that 3 circumstances change, by only writing “no” or “N/A” in response to the application questions, 4 Varner has left the Court without the ability to determine whether Varner qualifies for in forma 5 pauperis status in this case when considering Varner’s answers in the other case. 6 When applying for in forma pauperis status, the applicant’s affidavit must state the facts 7 regarding the individual’s poverty “with some particularity, definiteness and certainty.” United 8 States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981) (citation omitted). If an individual is 9 unable or unwilling to verify his or her poverty, district courts have the discretion to make a 10 factual inquiry into a plaintiff’s financial status and to deny a request to proceed in forma 11 pauperis. See, e.g., Marin v. Hahn, 271 Fed.Appx. 578 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding that the district 12 court did not abuse its discretion by denying the plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis 13 because he “failed to verify his poverty adequately”). “Such affidavit must include a complete 14 statement of the plaintiff’s personal assets.” Harper v. San Diego City Admin. Bldg., No. 16-cv- 15 00768 AJB (BLM), 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192145, at *1 (S.D. Cal. June 9, 2016). 16 Misrepresentation of assets is sufficient grounds for denying an in forma pauperis application. 17 Cf. Kennedy v. Huibregtse, 831 F.3d 441, 443-44 (7th Cir. 2016) (affirming dismissal with 18 prejudice after litigant misrepresented assets on in forma pauperis application). 19 The Court thus denies Varner’s applications without prejudice and will give Varner 20 another opportunity to file a complete in forma pauperis application. The Court further orders 21 that Varner may not respond with a zero or “not applicable” in response to any question without 22 providing an explanation for each of the questions. Varner also may not leave any questions 23 blank. Varner must describe each source of money that Varner receives, state the amount 24 received, and state what is expected in the future. Varner must fully answer all applicable 25 questions and check all applicable boxes. Varner may alternatively pay the filing fee in full. 26 Because the Court denies Varner’s application, it does not screen the amended complaint at this 27 time. ] Finally, as the Court stated previously, if Strawter wishes to continue in this matter, 2 || Strawter must file a separate application to proceed in forma pauperis that outlines Strawter’s 3 || assets and financial obligations and is signed by Strawter. Strawter’s application must also be 4 || complete as outlined above. If the minor children are to proceed as plaintiffs in this case, they 5 || must be represented by a lawyer. 6 7 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Varner’s applications to proceed in forma 8 || pauperis (ECF Nos. 13 and 14) are denied without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is kindly 9 || directed to send Varner and Strawter a copy of this order. 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Varner and Strawter shall have until June 19, 2024 to 11 || file separate and complete applications to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee. 12 || Failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation to the district judge that 13 || the case be dismissed. 14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if their claims are to proceed, the minor children 15 || Plaintiffs must appear through counsel on or before June 19, 2024. 16 17 DATED: May 17, 2024 18 □ 19 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS 20 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28