Williams v. Waggon

S.D. Illinois

Williams v. Waggon

DecidedOctober 6, 2020

Docket3:19-cv-00845

StatusUnknown

This text of Williams v. Waggon (Williams v. Waggon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Williams v. Waggon, (S.D. Ill. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

FREDERICK H. WILLIAMS, ) #B80874 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. 19-CV-845-DWD vs. ) ) S. WAGGON, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DUGAN, District Judge. Plaintiff Frederick Williams filed a Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on August 27, 2020. (Doc. 28). However, Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on August 14, 2020 which occurred prior to the Plaintiff filing his IFP Motion. (Doc. 25). Although Plaintiff had been granted IFP status by the District Court for the Central District of Illinois prior to transfer to this Court, Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed for failure to pay the docket fee or move for IFP status. (Doc. 25-1). At this point, there is no appeal for which the Court to grant or deny IFP status. The federal statute authorizing in forma pauperis proceedings is prospective in nature, authorizing “the commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit, action or proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without prepayment of fees or security therefor” for qualifying individuals. See Abdul-Wadood v. Nathan, 91 F.3d 1023, 1025 (7th Cir. 1996) (“All § 1915 has ever done is excuse pre-payment of the docket fees[.]”) (emphasis original); Bryan v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 418 F.2d 486, 489 (5th Cir. 1969). The appeal was dismissed, and so prepayment is no longer an issue. As such, the Motion is DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: October 6, 2020

DAVID W. DUGAN United States District Judge

Page 2 of 2

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

FREDERICK H. WILLIAMS, ) #B80874 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. 19-CV-845-DWD vs. ) ) S. WAGGON, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DUGAN, District Judge. Plaintiff Frederick Williams filed a Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on August 27, 2020. (Doc. 28). However, Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on August 14, 2020 which occurred prior to the Plaintiff filing his IFP Motion. (Doc. 25). Although Plaintiff had been granted IFP status by the District Court for the Central District of Illinois prior to transfer to this Court, Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed for failure to pay the docket fee or move for IFP status. (Doc. 25-1). At this point, there is no appeal for which the Court to grant or deny IFP status. The federal statute authorizing in forma pauperis proceedings is prospective in nature, authorizing “the commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit, action or proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without prepayment of fees or security therefor” for qualifying individuals. See Abdul-Wadood v. Nathan, 91 F.3d 1023, 1025 (7th Cir. 1996) (“All § 1915 has ever done is excuse pre-payment of the docket fees[.]”) (emphasis original); Bryan v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 418 F.2d 486, 489 (5th Cir. 1969). The appeal was dismissed, and so prepayment is no longer an issue. As such, the Motion is DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: October 6, 2020

DAVID W. DUGAN United States District Judge

Page 2 of 2

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Williams v. Waggon, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-waggon-ilsd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack