WILSON v. DAWSON

M.D. Georgia

WILSON v. DAWSON

DecidedMarch 4, 2025

Docket3:25-cv-00031

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

WILSON v. DAWSON, (M.D. Ga. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATHENS DIVISION

GENE RENARD WILSON, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Case No. 3:25-cv-31-CDL-AGH : Officer JOHNATHAN DAWSON, : et al., : : Defendants. : _________________________________ : ORDER

On March 3, 2025, Plaintiff filed a complaint (ECF No. 1) and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 2). Plaintiff, however, failed to provide sufficient information for the Court to determine whether he qualifies to proceed IFP. Plaintiff reports currently having zero income, no assets, and no expenses. Mot. to Proceed IFP 1-5, ECF No. 2. Other than noting that he does not work, he provides no explanation whatsoever as to how he is able to subsist. Id. As drafted, the affidavit is not “‘sufficient on its face to demonstrate economic eligibility’ for in forma pauperis status.” Martinez v. Kristi Kleaners, Inc., 364 F.3d 1305, 1307-08 (11th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Therefore, Plaintiff is ORDERED to recast his motion for leave to proceed IFP within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS. Plaintiff must provide a more detailed explanation of his funds, assets, expenses, and how he subsists without any income or expenses. The Clerk is DIRECTED to forward the appropriate form to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED, this 4th day of March, 2025. s/ Amelia G. Helmick UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATHENS DIVISION

GENE RENARD WILSON, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Case No. 3:25-cv-31-CDL-AGH : Officer JOHNATHAN DAWSON, : et al., : : Defendants. : _________________________________ : ORDER

On March 3, 2025, Plaintiff filed a complaint (ECF No. 1) and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 2). Plaintiff, however, failed to provide sufficient information for the Court to determine whether he qualifies to proceed IFP. Plaintiff reports currently having zero income, no assets, and no expenses. Mot. to Proceed IFP 1-5, ECF No. 2. Other than noting that he does not work, he provides no explanation whatsoever as to how he is able to subsist. Id. As drafted, the affidavit is not “‘sufficient on its face to demonstrate economic eligibility’ for in forma pauperis status.” Martinez v. Kristi Kleaners, Inc., 364 F.3d 1305, 1307-08 (11th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Therefore, Plaintiff is ORDERED to recast his motion for leave to proceed IFP within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS. Plaintiff must provide a more detailed explanation of his funds, assets, expenses, and how he subsists without any income or expenses. The Clerk is DIRECTED to forward the appropriate form to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED, this 4th day of March, 2025. s/ Amelia G. Helmick UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

WILSON v. DAWSON, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-dawson-gamd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack