Petersen v. Snohomish County Superior Court

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 JERRY DEAN PETERSEN, CASE NO. C23-1093 MJP-BAT 11 Plaintiff, ORDER REVOKING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS 12 v. COURT, and THE STATE OF 15 Defendant. 16 17 This matter comes before the Court on referral from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 18 for the limited purpose of determining whether in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status should continue 19 for the sake of Plaintiff’s appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith. (Dkt. 20 No. 15.) The Court finds that Plaintiff’s appeal to the Ninth Circuit is frivolous and revokes his 21 IFP status. 22 A litigant who cannot afford the expense of an appeal may move for leave to proceed 23 IFP. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). But “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma 24 1 pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 2 1915(a)(3); Hooker v. Am. Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002). A “good faith” appeal 3 must seek review of at least one “non-frivolous” issue or claim. Id. An issue is “frivolous” where 4 it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitze v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).

5 Legally frivolous claims are those “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory,” such as 6 claims against defendants who are immune from suit or for infringement of a legal interest that 7 clearly does not exist. Id. at 327. Factually frivolous claims are those premised on “clearly 8 baseless” factual contentions, such as claims “describing fantastic or delusional scenarios.” Id. at 9 327-28. 10 Plaintiff has not shown he brings this appeal in “good faith” because he fails to seek 11 review of at least one “non-frivolous” issue or claim. Hooker, 302 F.3d at1092. This Court 12 previously adopted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed the case because Plaintiff 13 seeks relief from defendants who are immune from suit. (Dkt. No. 12.) Plaintiff’s appeal 14 continues to seek relief from defendants immune from suit. For this reason, the Court has not

15 found “at least one issue or claim” Plaintiff wishes to appeal is “non-frivolous.” Hooker, 302 16 F.3d at 1092. The Court certifies the proposed appeal is not taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. 17 § 1915(a)(3). The Court hereby revokes Plaintiff’s IFP status pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). 18 The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to Plaintiff, all counsel, and the Ninth 19 Circuit Court of Appeals. 20 Dated January 3, 2024. A 21 22 Marsha J. Pechman United States Senior District Judge 23 24