2:23-cv-06184
E.D. La.Aug 27, 2024Background
- Vernon J. Tatum, Jr. alleged his Social Security benefits were wrongfully garnished due to allegedly untimely SBA loan billing statements.
- He sought a preliminary injunction to stop the garnishment, naming the U.S. Treasury, SSA, and SBA as defendants.
- Tatum was initially granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in district court.
- The district court dismissed his claims against the Treasury and SSA for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
- Remaining claims against the SBA were dismissed because the requested injunctive relief is expressly barred by 15 U.S.C. § 634(b)(1).
- Tatum appealed and moved to proceed IFP on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFP Status on Appeal | Tatum argued for permission to appeal IFP | Appeal is not taken in good faith | Denied: No nonfrivolous issues; appeal not in good faith |
| Subject Matter Jurisdiction | Court should consider failure to notify address | No jurisdiction over Treasury & SSA | Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction |
| Injunctive Relief Against SBA | Sought injunction to stop garnishment | Statute prohibits injunctive relief | Relief barred by statute |
Key Cases Cited
- Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215 (5th Cir. 1983) (sets standard for good faith in IFP appeals; a nonfrivolous issue is one that is arguable on the merits)