Smith v. Long

Eighth Circuit

Smith v. Long

172 F. App'x 700

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided March 28, 2006·No. No. 05-2535·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Stanley Paul Smith submitted a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint with an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). The district court¹ denied Smith IFP status, he paid the filing fee, and the complaint was filed and is currently pending in the district court. We therefore dismiss this appeal as premature. See 8th Cir. R. [702]*70247A(a). We also deny Smith’s pending motions.

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

PER CURIAM.

Stanley Paul Smith submitted a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint with an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). The district court¹ denied Smith IFP status, he paid the filing fee, and the complaint was filed and is currently pending in the district court. We therefore dismiss this appeal as premature. See 8th Cir. R. [702]*70247A(a). We also deny Smith’s pending motions.

Smith v. Long, 172 F. App'x 700 (8th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

172 F. App'x 700 (Smith v. Long) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related