Wescott v. First American Financial Corporation et al
| Carl A. Wescott |
| First American Financial Corporation, First American Title Insurance Company and Does 1 through 10 |
| 1:2023cv16709 |
| December 12, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John Robert Blakey |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 22, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: The federal in forma pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. 1915, is designed to ensure indigent litigants meaningful access to the federal courts while simultaneously preventing indigent litigants from filing frivolous, malicious, or repetitive lawsuits. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989). Before authorizing a litigant to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court must make two determinations: first, the Court must determine that the litigant is unable to pay the $405 filing fee; and, second, the Court must determine that the action is neither frivolous nor malicious, does not fail to state a claim, and does not seek money damages against a defendant immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. 1915(a), (e). The first determination is made through a review of the litigant's assets as stated in an affidavit submitted to the Court. The second is made by looking to the plaintiff's allegations. An action is frivolous if it is clear that the legal theory or the facts alleged are baseless or irrational. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 324; Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992). Here, Plaintiff indicates that he previously earned $12,500 per month; although that was several years ago, the income level (more than 5 times the threshold) remains sufficiently high that the Court cannot find Plaintiff eligible for pauper status, especially because he lists no dependents and few debts and financial obligations. See #3 . Additionally, although Plaintiff concludes in his complaint that diversity jurisdiction exists, the facts alleged belie that conclusion because he also alleges that his damages consist of his lost capital, $22,780.68 + interest; such damages fall significantly short of the $75,000 threshold. The Court thus denies Plaintiff's IFP application #3 and dismisses Plaintiff's complaint #1 . If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with this case, he must pay the filing fee and file an amended complaint, the allegations of which demonstrate the existence of federal subject matter jurisdiction; he should also allege facts to support a finding that venue is proper in this District. See 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) ("A civil action may be brought in-- (1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated; or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction with respect to such action."). If Plaintiff fails to comply by 2/29/24, the Court will dismiss this case. The Court denies without prejudice Plaintiff's motion for an order for service of process #8 . Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 8 MOTION requesting order for service of process by Plaintiff Carl A. Wescott. (ph, ) |
| Filing 6 ANNUAL REMINDER: Pursuant to #Local Rule 3.2 (Notification of Affiliates)#, any nongovernmental party, other than an individual or sole proprietorship, must file a statement identifying all its affiliates known to the party after diligent review or, if the party has identified no affiliates, then a statement reflecting that fact must be filed. An affiliate is defined as follows: any entity or individual owning, directly or indirectly (through ownership of one or more other entities), 5% or more of a party. The statement is to be electronically filed as a PDF in conjunction with entering the affiliates in CM/ECF as prompted. As a reminder to counsel, parties must supplement their statements of affiliates within thirty (30) days of any change in the information previously reported. This minute order is being issued to all counsel of record to remind counsel of their obligation to provide updated information as to additional affiliates if such updating is necessary. If counsel has any questions regarding this process, this #LINK# will provide additional information. Signed by the Executive Committee on 12/28/2023: Mailed notice. (tg, ) |
| Filing 7 LETTER from Carl A. Wescott dated 12/18/2023. (ph, ) |
| Filing 4 LETTER from Carl A. Wescott dated 12/16/2023. (Envelope postmark 12/18/2023) (ph, ) |
| MAILED copy of the Clerk's Notice entry along with the Joint Consent Form to Plaintiff Carl A. Wescott. (ph, ) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (ph, ) |
| Filing 3 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Carl A. Wescott for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Exhibits) (ph, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (ph, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and no copies by Carl A. Wescott. (Exhibits) (ph, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Heather K. McShain. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3). (ph, ) |
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 Illinois Northern 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.
