Kister v. Wynn (INMATE 1)
This text of Kister v. Wynn (INMATE 1) (Kister v. Wynn (INMATE 1)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
JOHN ANDREW KISTER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:21cv222-MHT ) (WO) MARIA WYNN, et al., ) ) Defendants. )
ORDER This cause is now before the court on plaintiff's notice of appeal (Doc. 56), which the court is treating as a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) provides that "an appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith." See also F.R.A.P. 24(a)(3)(A) (“A party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district-court action ... may proceed on appeal in forma pauperis without further authorization, unless ... the district court--before or after the notice of appeal is filed--certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith”). In making this determination as to
good faith, a court must use an objective standard, such as whether the appeal is "frivolous," Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962), or "has no substantive merit." United States v. Bottoson, 644
F.2d 1174, 1176 (5th Cir. Unit B May 15, 1981) (per curiam); see also Rudolph v. Allen, 666 F.2d 519, 520 (11th Cir. 1982) (per curiam); Morris v. Ross, 663 F.2d 1032 (11th Cir. 1981). Applying this standard, this
court is of the opinion that the plaintiff's appeal is without a legal or factual basis and, accordingly, is frivolous and not taken in good faith. See, e.g.,
Rudolph v. Allen, supra; Brown v. Pena, 441 F. Supp. 1382 (S.D. Fla. 1977), aff'd without opinion, 589 F.2d 1113 (5th Cir. 1979). ***
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the plaintiff's motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is
2 denied; and that the appeal in this cause is certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), as not taken in good
faith. DONE, this the 19th day of January, 2024.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Kister v. Wynn (INMATE 1), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kister-v-wynn-inmate-1-almd-2024.