Hicks v. Commissioner of Social Security
| Angelo T. Hicks, Sr. |
| Commissioner of Social Security |
| Social Security Administration |
| 3:2019cv00360 |
| March 8, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Sarah A L Merriam |
| Stefan R Underhill |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 14, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
RECOMMENDED RULING. The Court recommends that plaintiff's #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis be DENIED, without prejudice to re-filing. Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking to proceed without payment of fees and costs, which motion includes a sworn statement relating to plaintiff's current financial circumstances. See Doc. #2 . That sworn statement, however, is incomplete, leaving the Court unable to fully assess plaintiff's financial circumstances. Although plaintiff states that he is unable to pay the filing fee under the pains and penalties of perjury, plaintiff provides no information regarding his current or former income, nor his monthly expenses. See id. at 3. Plaintiff states only that he is currently unemployed and receives some support from family and friends. See, generally, id. at 3-5. "The court may deny an application to proceed in forma pauperis if [the applicant] fails to submit the required financial information[.]" Whatley v. Astrue, No. 5:11CV1009(NAM)(ATB), 2011 WL 5222908, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Oct. 14, 2011), report and recommendation adopted, 2011 WL 5196716 (Oct. 31, 2011) (citation omitted); see also Schwarz v. I.R.S., 998 F. Supp. 201, 202 (N.D.N.Y. 1998) (denying application to proceed in forma pauperis where plaintiff failed to complete application). Accordingly, the Court recommends that plaintiff's #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis be DENIED, without prejudice to re-filing. Plaintiff shall re-file his motion or pay the required filing fee on or before April 4, 2019, or this case may be dismissed. If plaintiff chooses to re-file his motion, he must complete all of the required information. While plaintiff may indicate that his income is "$0" or that a particular question does not apply to his situation, he may not leave significant sections of the affidavit form entirely blank. If plaintiff has previously been employed, he must provide information regarding that employment where requested.This is a recommended ruling. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(1). Any objections to this recommended ruling must be filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen (14) days of being served with this order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Failure to object within fourteen (14) days will preclude appellate review. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Rules 72, 6(a) and 6(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 72.2; Small v. Secretary of H.H.S., 892 F.2d 15 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam); F.D.I.C. v. Hillcrest Assoc., 66 F.3d 566, 569 (2d Cir. 1995). It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Sarah A. L. Merriam on 3/14/19. (Dowie, C)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES Signed by Clerk on 3/12/2019.(Fazekas, J.) |
| Answer deadline updated for Commissioner of Social Security to 5/7/2019. (Fazekas, J.) |
|
Filing 5
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 3/8/2019.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 4
STANDING SCHEDULING ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 3/8/2019.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 3
STANDING ORDER ON SOCIAL SECURITY APPEALS. Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 3/8/2019. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(Fazekas, J.)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Angelo T. Hicks, Sr. Motions referred to Sarah A. L. Merriam(Fazekas, J.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Commissioner of Social Security, filed by Angelo T. Hicks, Sr.(Fazekas, J.) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
