Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hopkins v. State

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION


October 29, 2007

GLENN J. HOPKINS, ON BEHALF OF SELF AND OTHER DISABLED INDIVIDUALS RESIDING AS TENANTS IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, AND CINDY S. HOPKINS, ON BEHALF OF SELF AND OTHER DISABLED INDIVIDUALS RESIDING AS TENANTS IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
STATE OF ILLINOIS, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard Mills, U.S. District Judge

OPINION

This case is before the Court on the Plaintiffs' application and petition to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

The Plaintiffs have filed an application and motion to proceed without prepayment of fees. Plaintiff Glenn J. Hopkins states that his only source of income is his social security disability payment in the amount of $628.00 per month. He further states that his wife, Plaintiff Cindy Hopkins, is also disabled and unemployed and is dependent on him for support. Glenn Hopkins does not say whether his wife also receives social security disability. The Court will deny the Plaintiffs' petition.

Notwithstanding the payment of the filing fee or a portion thereof, a court shall dismiss the case if the action is frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The Plaintiffs seek to file a 72-page complaint which appears to include twelve counts, wherein the Plaintiffs purport to assert claims for declaratory relief and damages. The complaint names as Defendants the State of Illinois, the Attorney General, several current or former state court judges and justices and two practicing attorneys. The first paragraph of the complaint that Plaintiffs seek to file states that they seek "to be heard on applicable issues of Federal law in the State Courts of Illinois, addressing Illinois State Court rules, policies and practices that unlawfully discriminate against Disabled civil litigants."

The Court has carefully reviewed the Plaintiffs' proposed complaint and determined that it is frivolous. Pursuant to section 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), therefore, the Court will dismiss the case.

Ergo, this case is dismissed on the basis of frivolousness under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The Plaintiffs' application and petition to proceed in forma pauperis [d/e 2] is DENIED AS MOOT.

ENTER: October 26, 2007

Richard Mills United States District Judge

20071029

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.