Ford v. Sherwin-Williams

D. Kansas

Ford v. Sherwin-Williams

DecidedMay 8, 2025

Docket6:25-cv-01022

StatusUnknown

This text of Ford v. Sherwin-Williams (Ford v. Sherwin-Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ford v. Sherwin-Williams, (D. Kan. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Steven M. Ford. ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 25-1022-DDC-GEB ) Sherwin-Williams ) ) Defendant. ) )

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 4) and supporting Affidavit of Financial Status (ECF No. 4-2, sealed). For the reasons outlined below, Plaintiff’s Motion (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court has the discretion1 to authorize the 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 After careful review of Plaintiff’s description of his financial resources (ECF No. 4-2, sealed), and the comparison of the listed monthly income to listed monthly expenses, the Court finds Plaintiff is financially unable to pay the filing fee.

1 Barnett ex rel. Barnett v. Nw. Sch., No. 00-2499, 2000 WL 1909625, at *1 (D. Kan. Dec. 26, 2000) (citing Cabrera v. Horgas, 173 F.3d 863, at *1 (10th Cir. April 23, 1999)). 2 Id. (quoting White v. Colorado, 157 F.3d 1226, 1233 (10th Cir. 1998)). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED. Because Plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis, the clerk of the court shall take the appropriate steps to serve Defendant with the summons and

Complaint as provided under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated at Wichita, Kansas this 8th day of May 2025.

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Steven M. Ford. ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 25-1022-DDC-GEB ) Sherwin-Williams ) ) Defendant. ) )

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 4) and supporting Affidavit of Financial Status (ECF No. 4-2, sealed). For the reasons outlined below, Plaintiff’s Motion (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court has the discretion1 to authorize the 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 After careful review of Plaintiff’s description of his financial resources (ECF No. 4-2, sealed), and the comparison of the listed monthly income to listed monthly expenses, the Court finds Plaintiff is financially unable to pay the filing fee.

1 Barnett ex rel. Barnett v. Nw. Sch., No. 00-2499, 2000 WL 1909625, at *1 (D. Kan. Dec. 26, 2000) (citing Cabrera v. Horgas, 173 F.3d 863, at *1 (10th Cir. April 23, 1999)). 2 Id. (quoting White v. Colorado, 157 F.3d 1226, 1233 (10th Cir. 1998)). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED. Because Plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis, the clerk of the court shall take the appropriate steps to serve Defendant with the summons and

Complaint as provided under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated at Wichita, Kansas this 8th day of May 2025.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ford v. Sherwin-Williams, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-v-sherwin-williams-ksd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack