(PS) Whitford v. Lassen County

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 26, 20242:24-cv-01650California983 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM BRETT WHITFORD, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-01650-TLN-CSK Plaintiffs, v. ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO PROCEED

LASSEN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, IFP, AND REQUIRING PLAINTIFFS TO

RE-FILE COMPLAINT SIGNED BY ALL

Defendant. PLAINTIFFS (ECF No. 2) 17 Plaintiffs William Brett Whitford and Jacqueline Marie Costa are representing themselves in this action and seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.1 (ECF No. 2.) For the reasons stated below, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs’ request to proceed IFP. I. LEGAL STANDARDS All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in any district court of the United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a party's failure to pay the filing fee only if the party is granted leave to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.