Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-00010/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-00010-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH JOHNSON, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

JAMES S. CAHAN; et al., 

Defendants. /

No. C 08-010 SI (pr)

ORDER DENYING PAUPER

APPLICATION

Joseph Johnson filed a civil rights complaint and an in forma pauperis application. When

his initial filing arrived at the courthouse, a notice of deficiency was sent out to him, directing

him to file a prisoner's pauper application, including an inmate trust account statement and

certificate of funds. Johnson then filed a "civil patient's (non prisoner) motion/request/

application to proceed in forma pauperis." In that motion, Johnson urged that, as a civilly

committed sexually violent predator, he is not a prisoner within the meaning of the Prison

Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("PLRA") and therefore does not need to file a prisoner's pauper

application or submit a copy of his trust account statement. 

Johnson is correct that he is not a prisoner subject to the PLRA. However, as the court

has explained to Johnson numerous times, the court must have enough information about a

pauper applicant's financial wherewithal to make an informed determination whether that person

should be permitted to proceed as a pauper – regardless of whether he is a prisoner or a nonprisoner. Johnson's original in forma pauperis application stated that he receives "some funds"

of an unstated amount from friends and/or family. Application, p. 4. And the statements in his

motion indicate that he has a trust account, but refuses to provide a copy of the statement for it.

Motion, p. 4. 

Case 3:08-cv-00010-SI Document 5 Filed 09/29/08 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Johnson's application and motion do not provide enough information for the court to

make an informed decision on his pauper application. Although a trust account statement is not

mentioned on the non-prisoner in forma pauperis application form, it is an appropriate

requirement for someone who is in custody and is having some or all of his basic needs met. For

example, if someone in custody has $500 in a trust account and someone out of custody has $500

in a checking account, their overall financial situations likely are not comparable because the

person in custody has no housing expenses while the person not in custody may have rent and

utility expenses. The in forma pauperis application is DENIED because it provides insufficient

information for the court to make its decision as to whether to grant pauper status and/or to

require a partial filing fee. (Docket # 2, # 4.) 

As mentioned earlier, the court has repeatedly explained to Johnson that it needs an

accurate picture of his finances – which includes information about funds in a trust account for

an incarcerated person having all his basic needs met – if he wants to proceed as a pauper. The

court issued orders addressing this very topic in In Re. Johnson, C 03-3292 SI, Johnson v.

Hunter, C 04-775 SI, Johnson v. Santa Clara County, C 05-1628 SI, Johnson v. Hunter, C 05-

2064 SI, and Johnson v.Mayberg, C 08-1177 SI. (Although the most recent order in C 08-1177

SI post-dates the filings in the present case, that order was issued months ago, and Johnson has

chosen not to update the pending applications in this case with the information.) In light of the

fact that the court has repeatedly determined that this plaintiff's applications must include the

trust account statement so that the court can make an informed decision about whether he should

be permitted to proceed as a pauper, and Johnson's choice not to provide the trust account

statement in this action, the court determines that Johnson's refusal to provide the statement is

made in bad faith. Johnson's refusal to state how much money he receives or possesses, other

than to say it is "some funds" also shows a deliberate refusal to provide a complete and accurate

picture of Johnson's financial situation. Although the court frequently allows pauper applicants

to supplemental their applications when they have neglected to provide enough information in

their application, the court will not do so here because the omission of the necessary information

is intentional and not the result of neglect. 

Case 3:08-cv-00010-SI Document 5 Filed 09/29/08 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

For the foregoing reasons, Johnson may not proceed as a pauper in this action. He must

pay the full filing fee no later than October 20, 2008. Failure to pay the filing fee by that

deadline will result in the dismissal of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 29, 2008 _______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-00010-SI Document 5 Filed 09/29/08 Page 3 of 3