Regan Amato, et al. v. Fire Investigator Mark Montgomery, et al.

N.D. Ohio

Regan Amato, et al. v. Fire Investigator Mark Montgomery, et al.

DecidedNovember 19, 2025

Docket3:25-cv-01821

StatusUnknown

This text of Regan Amato, et al. v. Fire Investigator Mark Montgomery, et al. (Regan Amato, et al. v. Fire Investigator Mark Montgomery, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Regan Amato, et al. v. Fire Investigator Mark Montgomery, et al., (N.D. Ohio 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Regan Amato, et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-1821

Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER

Fire Investigator Mark Montgomery, et al.,

Defendants.

On September 2, 2025, Plaintiffs Regan Amato and William J. Amato filed this civil action. (Doc. No. 1). They did not pay the filing fee. While Plaintiff Regan Amato filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis, (Doc. No. 2), Plaintiff William J. Amato did not. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, this Court may authorize the commencement of any action without prepayment of filing fees if the litigant submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets, income, and debt that demonstrates the person is unable to pay the filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Pauper status does not require absolute destitution. Foster v. Cuyahoga Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 21 F. App’x 239, 240 (6th Cir. 2001). Instead, the Court must examine the affidavit and determine whether the litigant can pay the court costs without undue hardship. Id. It is within the Court’s discretion to allow a litigant to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Id. Proceeding in forma pauperis is a privilege, and not a right. Wilson v. Yaklich, 148 F.3d 596, 603 (6th Cir. 1998). Here, Plaintiffs have not demonstrated an inability to pay the filing fee because they did not provide the Court with the requisite information showing neither could pay the court costs without undue hardship. Within thirty (30) days of this Order, Plaintiffs shall either: (a) pay the full filing fee of $405; or (b) file an application to proceed IFP that has been completed by Plaintiff William J. Amato. I direct the Clerk to mail a blank copy of the application to Mr. Amato with this Order. Failure to comply with this Order may result in dismissal of this case without further notice. Until this matter has been resolved, this case is stayed. No decision will be issued on any pending motion, and any and all deadlines currently in effect are stayed.

So Ordered.

s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick United States District Judge

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Regan Amato, et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-1821

Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER

Fire Investigator Mark Montgomery, et al.,

Defendants.

On September 2, 2025, Plaintiffs Regan Amato and William J. Amato filed this civil action. (Doc. No. 1). They did not pay the filing fee. While Plaintiff Regan Amato filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis, (Doc. No. 2), Plaintiff William J. Amato did not. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, this Court may authorize the commencement of any action without prepayment of filing fees if the litigant submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets, income, and debt that demonstrates the person is unable to pay the filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Pauper status does not require absolute destitution. Foster v. Cuyahoga Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 21 F. App’x 239, 240 (6th Cir. 2001). Instead, the Court must examine the affidavit and determine whether the litigant can pay the court costs without undue hardship. Id. It is within the Court’s discretion to allow a litigant to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Id. Proceeding in forma pauperis is a privilege, and not a right. Wilson v. Yaklich, 148 F.3d 596, 603 (6th Cir. 1998). Here, Plaintiffs have not demonstrated an inability to pay the filing fee because they did not provide the Court with the requisite information showing neither could pay the court costs without undue hardship. Within thirty (30) days of this Order, Plaintiffs shall either: (a) pay the full filing fee of $405; or (b) file an application to proceed IFP that has been completed by Plaintiff William J. Amato. I direct the Clerk to mail a blank copy of the application to Mr. Amato with this Order. Failure to comply with this Order may result in dismissal of this case without further notice. Until this matter has been resolved, this case is stayed. No decision will be issued on any pending motion, and any and all deadlines currently in effect are stayed.

So Ordered.

s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Regan Amato, et al. v. Fire Investigator Mark Montgomery, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/regan-amato-et-al-v-fire-investigator-mark-montgomery-et-al-ohnd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack