Legal Opinion

Howard v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided November 20, 2006No. 06-583CPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

HEWITT, Judge.

Before the court are plaintiffs Amended and Supplemental Pleadings (Amended Complaint or Am. Compl.) and Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Pl.’s Mot.), Defendant’s Motion for Summary Dismissal of Pro Se Complaint (Def.’s Motion or Def.’s Mot.), and Plaintiffs Response to Show Cause (Pl.’s Resp.). Plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis is incomplete. Plaintiff failed to provide an affidavit listing all assets held by the applicant and stating applicant’s inability to pay the filing fees as required by statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1)…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  3. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. United States v. SherwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  5. Karen S. Reynolds v. Army and Air Force Exchange ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hufford v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  2. Mendes v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  3. Phang v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  4. May v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
  5. McGrath v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API