Battagliese Corns v. Lapore

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. New York
DecidedFebruary 23, 2023
Docket2:23-cv-00093
StatusUnknown

This text of Battagliese Corns v. Lapore (Battagliese Corns v. Lapore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Battagliese Corns v. Lapore, (E.D.N.Y. 2023).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------------X For Online Publication Only JOANNE A. BATTAGLIESE CORNS,

Plaintiff, ORDER -against- 23-CV-0093 (JMA) (ARL) FILED MS. KATHLEEN LAPORE, MR. CHARLES BONE, CLERK GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL 1:47 pm, Feb 23, 2023 MEDICAL CENTER, PAT KURZ, and PAT HOGAN, U.S. DISTRICT COURT Defendants. EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------------X LONG ISLAND OFFICE AZRACK, United States District Judge: Before the Court is the in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application filed by pro se plaintiff Joanne A. Battagliese (“Plaintiff”). (ECF No. 7.) For the following reasons, the IFP application is denied without prejudice and with leave to renew upon completion of the AO 239 Long Form IFP application (“Long Form”) attached to this Order. Alternatively, Plaintiff may remit the $402.00 filing fee. The purpose of the IFP statute is to ensure that indigent persons have equal access to the judicial system. See Davis v. NYC Dep’t of Educ., No. 10-CV-3812, 2010 WL 3419671, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2010) (citation omitted). To qualify for IFP status, the Supreme Court has long held that “an affidavit is sufficient which states that one cannot because of his poverty pay or give security for the costs [inherent in litigation] and still be able to provide himself and dependents with the necessities of life.” Adkins v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948) (internal quotation marks omitted). The determination of whether an applicant qualifies for IFP status is within the discretion of the district court. DiGianni v. Pearson Educ., 10-CV-0206, 2010 WL 1741373, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 30, 2010) (citation omitted). The court may dismiss a case brought by a plaintiff requesting to proceed IFP if the “allegation of poverty is untrue.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A). Plaintiff’s IFP application, filed together with an amended complaint, does not include sufficient information concerning Plaintiff’s financial position. Plaintiff checked the box to indicate that the only income she has received in the past 12 months is a “[d]isability or worker’s compensation payment,” but she has not included the amount she received and what she expects

to receive in the future as the application requires. (ECF No. 7, ¶ 3.) Further, although Plaintiff reports a residential address and two telephone numbers in her amended complaint (ECF No. 6, ¶ I.A.), she has not included any expenses associated therewith in the space that calls for regular monthly expenses including housing and utilities. (Id. ¶ 6.) Nor has Plaintiff included any expenses for items including food, transportation, clothing, and health care. (Id.) Curiously, although Plaintiff reports having a negative balance in her savings or checking accounts, she reports having no debts or financial obligations. (Id. at ¶ 7.) As is readily apparent, Plaintiff’s application raises more questions than it answers. Because the Court finds that Plaintiff can best set forth her current financial position on the Long

Form, the present application to proceed IFP is denied without prejudice and with leave to renew on the Long Form within fourteen days from the date of this Order. Alternatively, Plaintiff may remit the $402.00 filing fee.1 Plaintiff is warned that a failure to timely comply with this Order may lead to the dismissal of the amended complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order

1 Plaintiff is cautioned that there are no refunds of the filing fee, once paid, regardless of the outcome of the case. Accordingly, Plaintiff is well-advised to consider the substance of her complaint and the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. Plaintiff is encouraged to avail herself of the free resources provided by the Pro Se Legal Assistance Program run by Hofstra Law School (the “Program”). Plaintiff may contact the Program by telephone at 631-297-2575 or by e-mail at PSLAP@hofstra.edu. would not be taken in good faith and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of any appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444–45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at her address of record. SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2023 Central Islip, New York

/s/ (JMA) JOAN M. AZRACK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE AO 239 (Rev. 01/15) Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the

) Plaintiff/Petitioner ) v. ) Civil Action No. ) Defendant/Respondent ) APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS (Long Form) Affidavit in Support of the Application Instructions I am a plaintiff or petitioner in this case and declare Complete all questions in this application and then sign it. that I am unable to pay the costs of these proceedings Do not leave any blanks: if the answer to a question is “0,” and that I am entitled to the relief requested. I declare “none,” or “not applicable (N/A),” write that response. If under penalty of perjury that the information below is you need more space to answer a question or to explain your true and understand that a false statement may result in answer, attach a separate sheet of paper identified with your a dismissal of my claims. name, your case's docket number, and the question number. Signed: Date: 1. For both you and your spouse estimate the average amount of money received from each of the following sources during the past 12 months. Adjust any amount that was received weekly, biweekly, quarterly, semiannually, or annually to show the monthly rate. Use gross amounts, that is, amounts before any deductions for taxes or otherwise. Income source Average monthly income Income amount expected amount during the past 12 next month months You Spouse You Spouse Employment $ $ $ $ Self-employment $ $ $ $ Income from real property (such as rental income) $ $ $ $ Interest and dividends $ $ $ $ Gifts $ $ $ $ Alimony $ $ $ $ Child support $ $ $ $ AO 239 (Rev. 01/15) Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form) Retirement (such as social security, pensions, annuities, $ $ $ $ insurance) Disability (such as social security, insurance payments) $ $ $ $ Unemployment payments $ $ $ $ Public-assistance (such as welfare) $ $ $ $ Other (specify): $ $ $ $ $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Total monthly income: 2. List your employment history for the past two years, most recent employer first. (Gross monthly pay is before taxes or other deductions.) Employer Address Dates of employment Gross monthly pay $ $ 3. List your spouse's employment history for the past two years, most recent employer first. (Gross monthly pay is before taxes or other deductions.) Employer Address Dates of employment Gross monthly pay $ $ $ 4. How much cash do you and your spouse have? $ Below, state any money you or your spouse have in bank accounts or in any other financial institution.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Adkins v. E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.
335 U.S. 331 (Supreme Court, 1948)
Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Battagliese Corns v. Lapore, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/battagliese-corns-v-lapore-nyed-2023.