United States District Court, D. Kansas
TERRY M. DUDLEY, Plaintiff,
NORTH KANSAS CITY HOSPITAL, et al., Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
P. O'Hara U.S. Magistrate Judge.
se plaintiff, Terry M. Dudley, filed this
employment-discrimination action against her former employer.
She has moved to proceed with this action in forma
pauperis (ECF No. 3). The undersigned U.S. Magistrate
Judge, James P. O'Hara, respectfully recommends that the
motion be denied, but that plaintiff be given three months to
pay the filing fee.
1915 of Title 28 of the United States Code allows the court
to authorize the commencement of a civil action
“without prepayment of fees or security therefor, by a
person who submits an affidavit that . . . the person is
unable to pay such fees or give security
therefor.” To succeed on a motion to proceed in
forma pauperis, the movant must show a financial
inability to pay the required filing fees. “One need
not be ‘absolutely destitute' to proceed [in
forma pauperis], but [in forma pauperis] need
not be granted where one can pay or give security for the
costs ‘and still be able to provide himself and
dependents with the necessities of
life.'” “Proceeding in forma
pauperis in a civil case ‘is a privilege, not a
right-fundamental or otherwise.'” The decision to
grant or deny in forma pauperis status under
§ 1915 lies within the “wide
discretion” of the trial court.
affidavit of financial status indicates that although his
income is “not large, it allow[s] [her] some
discretionary spending money.” Plaintiff is employed and
earns a net income of approximately $2, 200 a month.
Plaintiffs monthly expenses are not excessive, totaling about
$1, 483. The difference between plaintiff's monthly
income and expenses is $717. In addition, plaintiff reports
having cash on hand in the amount of $50. She owns a Chrysler
200 automobile valued at $12, 000. Plaintiff has no
on this information, the undersigned concludes that plaintiff
has sufficient financial resources to pay the court's
filing fees. Accordingly, pursuant to Lister v. Dept. of
Treasury,  the undersigned hereby issues this report
and recommendation to the presiding U.S. District Judge,
Carlos Murguia, that plaintiff's motion to proceed in
forma pauperis be denied and that plaintiff be permitted
to pay the requisite filing fee in three equal monthly
installments. If plaintiff does not pay the fee, the
undersigned recommends that this case be dismissed without
is hereby informed that, within 14 days after she is served
with a copy of this report and recommendation, she may,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72,
file written objections to the report and recommendation.
Plaintiff must file any objections within the 14-day period
allowed if she wants to have appellate review of the proposed
findings of fact, conclusions of law, or the recommended
disposition. If plaintiff does not timely file her
objections, no court will allow appellate review.
 The undersigned is not herein
addressing whether plaintiff has filed this lawsuit in the
correct U.S. District Court, given that all defendants appear
to be residents of Missouri and the events giving rise to the
lawsuit appear to have occurred in Missouri.
28 US.C. § 1915(a)(1).
Lister v. Dept. of Treasury, 408 F.3d 1309, 1312
(10th Cir. 2005); United States v. Garcia, 164
Fed.Appx. 785, 786 n.1 (10th Cir. Jan. 26, 2006).
Lewis v. Center Market, 378 Fed.Appx. 780, 785 (10th
Cir. 2010) (quoting Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours
& Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948)).
Green v. Suthers, No. 99-1447, 208 F.3d 226 (table),
2000 WL 309268, at *2 (10th Cir. Mar. 27, 2000) (quoting
White v. Colo., 157 F.3d 1226, 1233 (10th Cir.
Garcia, 164 Fed.Appx. at 786 n. 1. See also
Lister, 408 F.3d at 1312 (“[W]e review the
district court's denial of IFP status for an abuse of