Schlobohm v. Ash

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

MATTHEW CHARLES SCHLOBOHM,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 23-3014-JWL

DONALD ASH, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiff brings this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. At the time the case was filed, Plaintiff was in custody at the Wyandotte County Adult Detention Center in Kansas City, Kansas. The Court granted Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (See Doc. 9.) On September 27, 2024, the Court entered a Memorandum and Order dismissing this case for failure to state a claim. (Docs. 101, 102). Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal (Doc. 115) on February 26, 2025. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. 116). The Court orders Plaintiff to show cause why the motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis should not be denied for failure to provide the information required by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). Federal Appellate Rule 24(a) requires a party who desires to appeal in forma pauperis to file a motion in the district court. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1). Under that rule, the moving party must file an affidavit that shows the party’s inability to pay and that states the issues that the party intends to present on appeal. See id. In addition, 28 U.S.C. § 1915 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Thus, “[i]n order to succeed on his motion, an appellant must show a financial inability to pay the required filing fees and the existence of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and facts in support of the issues raised on appeal.” DeBardeleben v. Quinlan, 937 F.2d 502, 505 (10th Cir. 1991). Plaintiff has not stated the issues that he intends to present on appeal – in either his notice of appeal or in his motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal – as required. Therefore, the

Court cannot determine whether the appeal is taken in good faith under the standard set forth above. Plaintiff must remedy this deficiency before the Court may rule on the instant motion. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff is required to show cause on or before March 28, 2025, why the motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. 116) should not be denied for failure to provide the required information as set forth herein. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated February 28, 2025, in Kansas City, Kansas.

S/ John W. Lungstrum JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE