Adams claimed that Inman defamed him by reporting to the police that Adams had hired 1 him to set the fire in which a woman was killed.

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_______________ No. 98-6021 WM

______________ In re: Anthony Ray Inman, * * Debtor. * * Craig S. Adams, * Appeal from the United State s * Bankruptcy Court for the Appellant, * Western District of Missouri * v. * * Anthony Ray Inman, * * Appellee. *

_______________ Submitted: March 17, 1998 Filed: March 26, 1998

_______________ Before WILLIAM A. HILL, SCOTT and DREHER, Bankruptcy Judges.

_______________ SCOTT, Bankruptcy Judge. Appellant Adams was convicted of arson and second degree murder in 1988. The debtor in this case was convicted wit h Ad ams, although on lesser offenses. Adams obtained a default jud gment against the debtor for defamation, and, upon th e 1 debtor filing a case under chapter 7 of the bankruptcy code , filed a complaint to determine dischargeability of28 U.S.C. § 1915 also establishes a “three strikes, you’re out” rule. Under 1915(g), a 2 prisoner may not bring a civil action or appeal if the prisoner has, on three or more prior occasions brought an action or appeal that was dismissed on the grounds that it was frivolous, malicious, or fails to state claim. Adams now has at least two strikes against him. See Adams v. Vanwormer , 910 S.W.2d 829 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995)(affirming trial court dismissal of petition as a “frivolous lawsuit without merit.”); see also Green v. Nottingham , 90 F.3d 415, 418 (10 Cir. th 1996)(court may take judicial notice that prisoner had other actions dismissed as frivolous). In addition to the statutory three-strikes rule, the filing of prior, frivolous appeals may be considered in determining whether to grant an application to proceed in forma pauperis

. See In re McDonald , 489 U.S. 180 (1989). The Honorable Arthur B. Federman, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Western 3 District of Missouri. Judge Federman’s opinion is the tenth of a series of opinions arising from Adams’ civil and criminal appeals. See Adams v. Vanwormer , 910 F.W.2d 829 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995); Adams v. James , 9006 S.W.2d 869 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995); Adams v. Ware , 901 S.W.2d 269 (Mo. Ct. App.), cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 390 (1995); Adams v. Groose , 889 S.W.2d 175 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994); Adams v. Vanwormer , 892 S.W.2d 655 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994), cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 141 (1995); Adams v. Inman , 892 S.W.2d 651 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994), cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 140 (1995); Adams v. James , 868 S.W.2d 161 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994); Adams v. Moore , 861 S.W.2d 680 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993); State v. Adams , 791 S.W.2d 761 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990). 2 debt und er section 523(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code. Adam s req uested and was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperi s un der 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act of 1996. Subsequently, the bankruptcy court granted summar y judgment in the debtor’s favor and the complaint was dismissed

. Ad ams appealed from that order and requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The bank ruptcy court denied the 2 3 motion for three reasons: (1) Adams paid only $4.4 6 of the fees required to be paid
un der 28 U.S.C. § 1915 in violation of the bankruptcy court’s order that the fees be paid over time. (2) The bankruptcy court certified in writing that th e appeal w as not taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3)

. (3) T he appeal was frivolous and the action failed t o st ate a claim for which relief could be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).3

Findin g no error of law or fact, we affirm the bankruptc y court’s decision to deny leave to appeal in forma pauperis

.There is a split of authority as to whether the bankruptcy court is a “court of the United 4 States,” as that term is used in title 28. Compare Jones v. Bank of Santa Fe( In re Courtesy Inns, Ltd. ), 40 F.3d 1084 (10th Circuit 1994)(bankruptcy court is not a court of the United States) with In reTCI, Ltd., 769 F.2d 441 (7th Cir. 1985)(bankruptcy court is a court of the United States). Although the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-394 (Oct. 22, 1994), 5 established certain pilot district in which debtors were permitted to proceed in forma pauperis , the Western District of Missouri is not one of those districts. 4 Adams first argues that 28 U.S.C. § 1915 is inapplicable to ban kruptcy proceedings such that the strictures of tha t statute do not apply. Section 1915 permits any court of th e Uni ted States to authorize the commencement of any suit , 4 action or proceeding, civil or cri minal, or an appeal therein, without prepayment of fees. Priso ners, however, although they may commence an action or appeal, must make monthly payment s until the filing fee is paid. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). Without the application of section1915, there is no statutory right by any person to proceed in forma pauperis in an y bankruptcy proceeding. 28 U.S.C. § 1930 specifical ly requires 5 pr epayment of fees before bankruptcy cases or proceedings may go f orward. Indeed, there is a split of authority as t o whether, even with the application of section 1915, that i n forma pauperis status is available in bankruptcy appeals

. Compare In re Meuli , 162 B.R. 327, 329 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1993)( i n forma pauperis status available) with In re Fitzgerald , 16 7 B.R
. 689 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1994)( in forma pauperis status no t permitte d in bankruptcy cases); In re Brickey , 119 B.R. 78 6 (Bankr

. D. Ore. 1990)(§1930 excepts application of §1915 i n bankru ptcycases, including appeals). Thus, if Adams i s correct in his assertion that section 1915 does not apply t o bankru ptcyproceedings, his application to proceed in form a pauperis before this court must be denied. Moreover, if Adams is correct, the bankruptcy court h ad no authority to grant his origin al application to file the complaint to determin e dischargeability in forma pauperis such that the complaint wasWe do not specifically decide in this appeal whether section 1915 applies in bankruptcy 6 cases and proceedings. 5 subject to dismissal for failure t o pay the appropriate filing fee.
Section 1915 provides that the Court may authorize a n appeal without prepayment of the required fee upon affidavi t that the applicant is unable to pay such costs. However, if 66

the trial court certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith, in forma pauperis status is unavailable. Analysis under sectio n1915 thus has two prongs: the applicant mus t demonstrate an inability to pay and objective good faith in th e appe al. Martin-Trigona v. Stewart , 691 F.2d 856 (8th Cir

. 1982). This Court has reviewed the record in this case an d agrees w ith the bankruptcy court’s findings of law and fac t with regard to its determination o f the application to proceed informa pauperis on appeal. Cf

. United States v. Slater , 96 F.R.D. 53, 55 n.9 (D. Del. 1982)(“The right to proceed o n app eal in forma pauperis, after the district court has full y reviewed all of the claims, presen ts a different circumstance. Insuch a situation, the court already has reviewed fully the litiga nt’s claims, and is in a much better position t o ascertain whether the issues raised are frivolous.”); se e genera lly Mann v. Frank , No. 90-1122-CV-W-5, 1992 WL 21980 0 (W .D. Mo. Sept. 2, 1992). The appeal is manifestly frivolous and not taken in good faith. The bankruptcy court addresse d each o f Adams’ legal arguments, including the rather bizarr e assertion that section 1915 consti tutes a Bill of Attainder in vio lationof the U.S. Constitution. Adams’ Motion for Leav e to Appea l in Forma Pauperis before this court being withou t merit, the Motion is denied. Appellant shall submit th e appropriate fee to the clerk of th e Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit within twenty (20) days of entry of thi s Order.
A true copy.

Attest:

CLER K, U.S. BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL FOR TH E EIGHTH CIRCUIT.