Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Savage v. International Longshore Association 1414

United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Savannah Division

September 16, 2019

DEANDREA SAVAGE, Plaintiff,
v.
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE ASSOCIATION 1414, et. al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          CHRISTOPHER L. RAY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE .

         Plaintiff, DeAndrea Savage, appearing pro se, has submitted a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Doc. 2. As additional clarification is needed, Plaintiff is DIRECTED to supplement her IFP request.

         Plaintiff reports no income from wages and $1, 150.00 having been received in the previous year from carpooling. Doc. 2 at 1. She has no liquid assets but owns two vehicles and a home. Doc. 2 at 2. Despite reporting no significant source of income, Plaintiff claims monthly expenses in excess of $2, 600.00, debts, and two dependents. Id. The Court presumes that Plaintiff's lack of income is the result of the employment suspension referred to in her Complaint. Nevertheless, the Court is concerned by the disparity between Plaintiff's income and expenses. Plaintiff is DIRECTED to provide clarification as to if she is receiving any source of income or assistance not reflected on the IFP application and, if not, how the reflected monthly expenses are being financed.

         The Court is also cognizant of a recently filed case involving a similarly named plaintiff, Andrea Savage, and nearly identical named defendants. The information reported in the respective IFP applications differs considerably. As such, Plaintiff is DIRECTED to confirm that she has no other pending cases before this court and, specifically, that she is not the named plaintiff in Savage v. International Longshore Association, et. al. CV4:19-224, filed September 11, 2019.

         Wary of indigency claims where information appears to have been omitted, and cognizant of how easily one may consume a public resource with no financial skin in the game, [1] this Court demands supplemental information from dubious IFP movants. See, e.g., Kareem v. Home Source Rental, 986 F.Supp.2d 1345 (S.D. Ga. 2013); Robbins v. Universal Music Grp., 2013 WL 1146865 at *1 (S.D. Ga. Mar.19, 2013).[2]

         To that end, it tolerates no lies. Ross v. Fogam, 2011 WL 2516221 at *1 (S.D. Ga. June 23, 2011) (“Ross, a convicted criminal, chose to burden this Court with falsehoods, not honesty. The Court thus rejects Ross's show cause explanation, as it is clear that he purposefully chose to disguise his filing history and financial status.”); Johnson v. Chisolm, 2011 WL 3319872 at *1 n. 3 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 1, 2011) (“This Court does not hesitate to invoke dismissal and other sanctions against inmates who lie to or otherwise deceive this Court.”); see also Moss v. Premiere Credit of North America, LLC, 2013 WL 842515 (11th Cir. Mar. 6, 2013) (“Moss's [IFP on appeal] motion is denied because her allegation of poverty appears to be untrue in light of her financial affidavit and filings in the district court.”).[3] Plaintiff's application for IFP status is not sufficiently clear. She, therefore, must amend her application to proceed IFP. Additionally, she must disclose[4] the following information within 14 days from the date of this Order:

(1) Clarify if she receives any income or assistance not reflected in the original IFP application;
(2) How her reported monthly expenses are being financed, if at all; and
(3) Clarify whether she has other pending cases before this Court and, specifically, if she is the named plaintiff in Savage v. International Longshore Association, et. al. CV4:19-224, filed September 11, 2019

         Providing this information will better illuminate Plaintiff's true financial condition. In that regard, she must again declare the facts she pleads to be true and sign her name to that declaration-under penalty of perjury. If she does not use a preprinted IFP form to respond (hence, if she uses a blank sheet of paper), she must insert this above her signature: “I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).” 28 U.S.C. § 1746(1). The Clerk is DIRECTED to serve with this Order a blank IFP form for Plaintiffs convenience. Failure to comply with this directive will result in a recommendation of dismissal on IFP-deficiency grounds alone. Kareem v. Home Source Rental, 2014 WL 24347 at *1 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 2, 2014).

         SO ORDERED

---------

Notes:

[1] “[A] litigant whose filing fees and court costs are assumed by the public ... lacks an economic incentive to refrain from filing frivolous, malicious, or repetitive lawsuits.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989). Courts thus deploy appropriate scrutiny. See Hobby v. Beneficial Mortg. Co. of Va., 2005 WL 5409003 at *7 (E.D. Va. June 3, 2005) (debtor denied IFP status where, although she was unable to find employment as a substitute teacher, she had not shown she is unable to work and earn income in other ways); In re Fromal, 151 B.R. 733, 735 (E.D. Va. 1993) (denying IFP application where debtor was licensed attorney and accountant and she offered no reason why she cannot find employment), cited in In re Zow, 2013 WL 1405533 at *2 (Bkrtcy. S.D. Ga. Mar. 4, 2013) (denying IFP to “highly educated” bankruptcy debtor who, inter alia, had “not shown he is physically unable to work or earn income in other ways.”); Nixon v. United Parcel Service, 2013 WL 1364107 at *1-2 (M.D. Ga. Apr. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.