Stone v. Ohio Parole Board

• Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
• Decided: March 4, 2021
• Docket: 2:21-cv-00884
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

JAMARR R. STONE, SR.,

Plaintiff, v. Civil Action 2:21-cv-884 Judge James L. Graham Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson

OHIO PAROLE BOARD, et. al.,

Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION On March 2, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (Doc. 1). The Supreme Court, in Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., set forth the legal standard applicable to a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 335 U.S. 331 (1948). An affidavit of poverty is sufficient if it reflects that the plaintiff cannot pay the Court’s filing fee without depriving himself the “necessities of life.” Id. at 339 (internal quotation marks omitted). Although the plaintiff need not be totally destitute in order to proceed in forma pauperis, paying the filing fee must be more than a mere hardship. See Foster v. Cuyahoga Dep’t of HHS, 21 F. App’x 239, 240 (6th Cir. 2001) (noting that “the question is whether the court costs can be paid without undue hardship”). Consequently, unless it is clear that the one-time payment of the Court’s filing fee will render the plaintiff unable to provide for himself, the Court cannot grant her in forma pauperis status. See Adkins, 335 U.S. at 339. In Plaintiff’s affidavit, he represents that although he is currently incarcerated, he has recently received $1,937.35 from his family for “legal fees and commissary.” (Doc. 1 at 2). Furthermore, the average monthly deposits into Plaintiff’s prison trust fund account were $280.00. (Id. at 5). Based on the foregoing, it does not appear that paying the $402.00 filing fee in this case would cause Plaintiff to be deprived the necessities of life. See Adkins, 335 U.S. at 339; see also Bush v. Ohio Dep’t of Rehab. & Corr., No. 2:05-CV-0667, 2007 WL 4365381, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 10, 2007) (noting that “[i]n forma pauperis status is usually reserved either for indigent prisoners or for persons who subsist on small fixed-income payments such as social security,

unemployment compensation, or public assistance and who would truly be required to forego food, shelter, clothing, or some other necessity were they to devote any of their scant resources to paying a judicial filing fee”). Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1) be DENIED. Procedure on Objections If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Report, file and serve on all parties written objections to those specific proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made, together with supporting authority for the objection(s). A Judge of this Court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is

made. Upon proper objections, a Judge of this Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made herein, may receive further evidence or may recommit this matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to have the District Judge review the Report and Recommendation de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: March 4, 2021 /s/ Kimberly A. Jolson KIMBERLY A. JOLSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE