Reported / Citable
Background
Pro se plaintiff Gene Graham applied to proceed in federal district court without prepaying the filing fee. His application reported average monthly income of $1,207 during the preceding 12 months from retirement payments and SNAP benefits, expected July income of $1,219, no dependents, and a vehicle apparently valued at $4,000.
Graham listed monthly expenses totaling $860, including $400 for food, $20 for laundry and dry cleaning, $150 for transportation, $200 for recreation and entertainment, and $90 for car insurance. Although he separately stated that his total monthly expenses were $1,014, he did not explain the $154 difference between that figure and the $860 in itemized expenses.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Brian McKay recommended denying Graham’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The recommendation concluded that Graham had not shown that paying the $405 filing fee would cause undue financial hardship because his disclosed income exceeded his itemized expenses, at least one reported expense appeared discretionary or excessive without explanation, and he anticipated no major change in his finances.
Because Graham had limited available monthly funds, the magistrate judge recommended allowing installment payments if appropriate. The recommended disposition was dismissal without prejudice unless Graham paid the $405 fee in full by August 13, 2026, paid four monthly installments of $101.25 from August 13 through November 13, 2026, or complied with another deadline established by the district court.
Key Takeaways
- An applicant seeking in forma pauperis status must show that paying court fees would cause undue financial hardship.
- The recommendation relied on Graham’s disclosed income, itemized expenses, unexplained discrepancy in his expense totals, and apparently discretionary spending.
- The proposed dismissal was conditional and without prejudice, leaving Graham an opportunity to pay the filing fee in full or, if appropriate, through installments.
Why It Matters
The recommendation illustrates that limited income does not automatically establish eligibility to proceed without prepayment. Courts may examine whether reported expenses are supported, mandatory, or discretionary and whether the applicant retains funds that could be applied toward the filing fee.
This document is a magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation—not a final order dismissing the case. The parties had 14 days after service to file specific written objections, and the district judge would determine whether to accept or reject the recommendation.