Flores v. United States AG
United States District Court for the District of Montana, Helena Division
April 27, 2015, Decided; April 27, 2015, Filed
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Eric Flores has filed a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, a proposed Complaint, and a Motion to Transfer. Docs. 1-3. Mr. Flores is proceeding without counsel.
Permission to proceed in forma pauperis is discretionary with the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). A court should grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis if the affidavit sufficiently indicates the affiant cannot pay court costs and still provide the necessities of life for himself and his family. Adkins v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., Inc., 335 U.S. 331, 339, 69 S. Ct. 85, 93 L. Ed. 43 (1948). "A district court may deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis at the outset if it appears from the face of the proposed complaint that the action is frivolous or without merit." Tripati v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Cir. 1987).
Mr. Flores, a resident of El Paso, Texas, submitted a pleading entitled "Petition [*2] to Challenge the Constitutionality of the First Amendment." The pleading is over 60 pages long. Mr. Flores raises two issues in his proposed Complaint:
(i) Whether government interference with a persons [sic] marriage resulting in separation of that marriage can be constituted as a constitutional deprivation of the first amendment right to free exercise of religious beliefs under the domestic legal pretext. (ii) Whether governmental interference with a persons [sic] communication to the state and federal law enforcement agencies so as to prevent an investigation of a crime committed against that person can be constituted as a constitutional deprivation of the first amendment right to freedom of speech.
Doc. 2 at 4.Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75970 *
ERIC FLORES, Plaintiff, vs. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, and FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendants.
Subsequent History: Adopted by, Motion denied by Flores v. United States AG, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75872 (D. Mont., June 11, 2015)
frivolous, in forma pauperis, proposed complaint, baseless, dismissal with prejudice, permission, vexatious, constitutional deprivation, governmental interference, first amendment right, interest of justice, federal court, reconsideration, allegations, calculated, complaints, delusional, fantastic, marriage, appears