Smith v. Jones
4:15-cv-00294
| E.D. Ark. | Jun 4, 2015Background
- Plaintiff Sheila Smith filed this civil action in the Eastern District of Arkansas Western Division pro se on May 27, 2015 and sought in forma pauperis status.
- The court explains the two-step framework under 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(1) and §1915(e)(2)(B) for IFP proceedings.
- The court preliminarily finds plaintiff economically eligible for IFP and grants the IFP application.
- The court then assesses whether the complaint is frivolous, fails to state a claim, or seeks impermissible relief under §1915(e)(2)(B).
- The complaint contains no discernable federal claim or jurisdictional basis; the court dismisses the action with prejudice on these grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the plaintiff qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis | Smith asserts poverty to obtain IFP status | Not explicitly stated in decision; standard requires economic eligibility | Granted |
| Whether the complaint is frivolous or fails to state a claim | Allegations of abuse and misconduct justify relief | Claims described as fantastical or baseless under Neitzke standard | Dismissed as frivolous and for failure to state a claim |
| Whether the court has federal subject-matter jurisdiction | Unknown/unclear from Complaint | No discernable federal basis presented | Lacks federal subject-matter jurisdiction; dismissed |
| Whether the case should be dismissed with prejudice | Not stated | Frivolous or non-redeemable claims justify dismissal | Dismissed with prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989) (frivolousness standard for §1915 dismissal)
- Christiansen v. Clarke, 147 F.3d 655 (8th Cir. 1998) (dismissal before service of process or leave to amend)
- Higgins v. Carpenter, 258 F.3d 797 (8th Cir. 2001) (application of frivolousness standard under §1915)