United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Macon Division
T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
Eugene William Greer has filed an application to appeal
in forma pauperis. Doc. 24. After reviewing the
record, the Court enters the following Order.
Plaintiff seeks, for the second time, to appeal the
Court's December 19, 2017 Order denying the
Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction and
dismissing without prejudice his Eighth Amendment failure to
protect and failure to provide medical treatment
claims. Doc. 14. Applications to appeal in
forma pauperis are governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and
Fed. R. App. P. 24. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 provides
(a) (1) [A]ny court of the United States may authorize the
commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit, action or
proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without
prepayment of fees or security therefore, by a person who
submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets
such prisoner possesses that the person is unable to pay such
fees or give security therefor. Such affidavit shall state
the nature of the action, defense or appeal and affiant's
belief that the person is entitled to redress. . . .
(3) An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial
court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good
Similarly, Fed. R. App. P. 24(a) provides:
(1) [A] party to a district-court action who desires to
appeal in forma pauperis must file a motion in the district
court. The party must attach an affidavit that:
(A) shows . . . the party's inability to pay or to give
security for fees and costs;
(B) claims an entitlement to redress; and
(C) states the issues that the party intends to present on
(2) If the district court denies the motion, it must state
its reasons in writing.
the Court must make two determinations when faced with an
application to proceed in forma pauperis. First, it
must determine whether the plaintiff is financially able to
pay the filing fee required for an appeal. Based on the
affidavit and attached trust account statement, it appears
the Plaintiff is unable to pay the $505 appellate filing fee.
Docs. 24; 24-1.
the Court must determine if the plaintiff has satisfied the
good faith requirement. “‘[G]ood faith' . . .
must be judged by an objective standard.” Coppedge
v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). The
plaintiff demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a
non-frivolous issue. Id. An issue “is
frivolous if it is ‘without arguable merit either in
law or fact.'” Napier v. Preslicka, 314
F.3d 528, 531 (11th Cir. 2002) (citations omitted).
“Arguable means capable of being convincingly
argued.” Sun v. Forrester, 939 F.2d 924, 925
(11th Cir. 1991) (quotation marks and citations omitted);
Carroll v. Gross, 984 F.2d 392, 393 (11th Cir. 1993)
(“[A] case is frivolous . . . when it appears the
plaintiff ‘has little or no chance of
success.'”) (citations omitted). “In deciding
whether an [in forma pauperis] appeal is frivolous,
a district court determines whether there is ‘a factual
and legal basis, of constitutional dimension, for the
asserted wrong, however inartfully pleaded.'”
Sun, 939 F.2d at 925 (citations omitted).
the Plaintiff has not submitted a statement of the issues he
intends to appeal, as is required under Fed. R. App. P.
24(a)(1)(C), this Court's independent review of the
issues addressed in this case demonstrates that the
Plaintiff's appeal is frivolous. See Hyche v.
Christensen, 170 F.3d 769, 771 (7th Cir. 1999),
overruled on other grounds by Lee v. Clinton, 209
F.3d 1025 (7th Cir. 2000) (explaining that the arguments to
be advanced on appeal are often obvious and decisions
regarding good faith can be made by looking at the
“reasoning of the ruling sought to be appealed”
instead of requiring a statement from the plaintiff). The
appeal, therefore, is not ...