Crayton v. LVNV Funding, LLC

• Court: District Court, D. Kansas
• Decided: September 5, 2025
• Docket: 6:25-cv-01061
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

LARRY DARNELL CRAYTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 25-1061-HLT-GEB ) LVNV FUNDING, LLC and WEBBANK ) dba FINGERHUT, ) ) Defendants. ) )

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Larry Darnell Crayton’s Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (ECF No. 4, sealed) and supporting Affidavits of Financial Status (ECF Nos. 4-1 sealed; 7 sealed). For the reasons outlined below, Plaintiff’s Motion (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court has discretion1 to authorize filing of a civil case “without prepayment of fees or security thereof, by a person who submits an affidavit that . . . the person is unable to pay such fees or give security thereof.” “Proceeding in forma pauperis in a civil case ‘is a privilege, not a right—fundamental or otherwise.’”2 The Court reviews the party’s financial affidavit and compares his or her monthly expenses

1 Barnett ex rel. Barnett v. Nw. Sch., No. 00-2499-KHV, 2000 WL 1909625, *1 (D. Kan. Dec. 26, 2000) (citing Cabrera v. Horgas, No. 98-4231, 173 F.3d 863, *1 (10th Cir. April 23, 1999)). 2 Id. (quoting White v. Colorado, 157 F.3d 1226, 1233 (10th Cir. 1998)). with the monthly income disclosed therein, to determine whether a party is eligible to file without prepayment of the fee.3 The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and this Court have a liberal policy toward

permitting proceedings in forma pauperis.4 After careful review of Plaintiff’s financial resources (ECF Nos. 4-1 sealed; 7 sealed), and comparison of Plaintiff’s listed monthly income and listed monthly expenses, the Court finds he is financially unable to pay the filing fee. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed Without

Prepayment of Fees (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Service of process shall be undertaken by the clerk of court under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated at Wichita, Kansas this 5th day of September 2025.

s/ Gwynne E. Birzer GWYNNE E. BIRZER United States Magistrate Judge

3 Alexander v. Wichita Hous. Auth., No. 07-1149-JTM, 2007 WL 2316902, *1 (D. Kan. Aug. 9, 2007) (citing Patillo v. N. Am. Van Lines, Inc., No. 02-2162-JWL, 2000 WL 1162684, *1) (D. Kan. April. 15, 2002) and Webb v. Cessna Aircraft, No. 00-2229-JWL, 2000 WL 1025575, *1 (D. Kan. July 17, 2000)). 4 Mitchell v. Deseret Health Care Facility, No. 13-1360-RDR, 2013 WL 5797609, *1 (D. Kan. Sept. 30, 2013) (citing, generally, Yellen v. Cooper, 828 F.2d 1471 (10th Cir. 1987)).