Petersen v. Snohomish County Superior Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 10 JERRY DEAN PETERSEN, CASE NO. C23-1093 MJP-BAT 11 Plaintiff, ORDER REVOKING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS 12 v. 13 SNOHOMISH COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, and THE STATE OF 14 WASHINGTON, 15 Defendant.

17 This matter comes before the Court on referral from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for the limited purpose of determining whether in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status should continue for the sake of Plaintiff’s appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith. (Dkt.

20 No. 15.) The Court finds that Plaintiff’s appeal to the Ninth Circuit is frivolous and revokes his IFP status.

22 A litigant who cannot afford the expense of an appeal may move for leave to proceed IFP. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). But “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 2 1915(a)(3); Hooker v. Am. Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002). A “good faith” appeal must seek review of at least one “non-frivolous” issue or claim. Id. An issue is “frivolous” where it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitze v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).

5 Legally frivolous claims are those “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory,” such as claims against defendants who are immune from suit or for infringement of a legal interest that clearly does not exist. Id. at 327. Factually frivolous claims are those premised on “clearly baseless” factual contentions, such as claims “describing fantastic or delusional scenarios.” Id. at 327-28.

10 Plaintiff has not shown he brings this appeal in “good faith” because he fails to seek review of at least one “non-frivolous” issue or claim. Hooker, 302 F.3d at1092. This Court previously adopted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed the case because Plaintiff seeks relief from defendants who are immune from suit. (Dkt. No. 12.) Plaintiff’s appeal continues to seek relief from defendants immune from suit. For this reason, the Court has not found “at least one issue or claim” Plaintiff wishes to appeal is “non-frivolous.” Hooker, 302 F.3d at 1092. The Court certifies the proposed appeal is not taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). The Court hereby revokes Plaintiff’s IFP status pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a).

18 The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to Plaintiff, all counsel, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

20 Dated January 3, 2024.

A 22 Marsha J. Pechman United States Senior District Judge