Strole v. Wirth
District Court, D. Arizona
1Opinion
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Sherri Strole, No. CV-24-08211-PCT-DJH 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Mark Wirth, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 Pro se Plaintiff Sherri Strole (“Plaintiff”) has filed an Application to Proceed in 16 District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs. (Doc. 2). Upon review, Plaintiff’s 17 Application, signed under penalty of perjury, indicates that she is financially unable to pay 18 the filing fee. The Court will therefore grant Plaintiff’s Application and allow her to 19 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). 20…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, SheriffCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Michael Lacey v. Joseph ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.