United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
May 27, 2011
CALVIN L. MERRITTE
THOMAS TEMPLETON, ET AL.
Name of Assigned Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan Sitting Judge if Other or Magistrate Judge than Assigned Judge
DOCKET ENTRY TEXT
For the reasons stated below, Plaintiff's second motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis  and his application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis  are denied, and the instant action is dismissed. Civil case terminated.
O[ For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Calvin L. Merritte's (Merritte) second motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. On April 25, 2011, the court denied Merritte's first motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis because Merritte had not provided sufficient information concerning his financial status. In denying the motion, the court noted that although Merritte indicated that in the past twelve months, he had received more than $200 in gifts, Merritte failed to indicate the total amount of such gifts. The court gave Merritte until May 20, 2011 to either pay the filing fee or file an accurately and properly completed in forma pauperis application form and warned Merritte that failure to either pay the filing fee or file an accurately and properly completed in forma pauperis application form by May 20, 2011 would result in the dismissal of the instant action.
In the instant motion, Merritte indicates that the total amount of gifts he received in the past twelve months was $294.00, and that such amount was received from Crystal Merritte on October 13, 2010. (IFP Par. 4(e)). However, a review of Merritte's prison trust account statement indicates that, in addition to the $294.00 Merritte identified on his in forma pauperis application form, Merritte has also received $1,224.00 in gifts from Crystal Merritte and Denard Stewart over the past six months. Thus, Merritte has provided inaccurate information on his in forma pauperis application form. Therefore, Merritte's second motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied and the instant action is dismissed. The court notes that even if Merritte had properly disclosed the amount of gifts he had received over the past twelve months, Merritte is incarcerated and is thus provided with the necessities of life. See Lumbert v. Illinois Dept. of Corrections, 827 F.2d 257, 260 (7th Cir. 1987)(stating that the plaintiff inmate was "not being asked to give up any necessities of life; they in any event [were] being bought for him by the State of Illinois"). Therefore, Merritte could not show that he is sufficiently indigent to warrant granting his second motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.