Verizon
(PS) Halousek v. Verizon
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SHEILA HALOUSEK, No. 2:22-cv-01728-TLN-JDP Plaintiff, v. ORDER VERIZON, Defendant.
17 On August 16, 2023, the Ninth Circuit referred the matter to this Court for the limited 18 purpose of determining whether Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status should continue on 19 appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith. (ECF No. 14 at 1 (citing 28 U.S.C. 20 § 1915(a)(3); Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002)).) 21 “An appeal may not be taken [IFP] if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken 22 in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). “The test for allowing an appeal [IFP] is easily 23 met . . . [t]he good faith requirement is satisfied if the [appellant] seeks review of any issue that is 24 ‘not frivolous.’” Gardner v. Pogue, 558 F.2d 548, 550–51 (9th Cir. 1977) (quoting Coppedge v. 25 U.S., 369 U.S. 438 445 (1962)); see also Hooker, 302 F.3d at 1092 (noting that an appeal is taken 26 in “good faith”…