Legal Opinion
Mertz v. United States Customs Service
United States Court of International Trade
Decided October 1, 1990No. Court 89-11-00639PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
RE, Chief Judge:
Plaintiff moves for an order permitting him to proceed with this action in forma pauperis and for appointment of counsel pro bono, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). The defendant takes no position on plaintiff’s motion and defers to the discretion of the court.
A court of the United States may permit a party to proceed with litigation in forma pauperis, that is, “without prepayment of fees and costs or security,” if the party shows by affidavit the inability to pay the costs or to give security. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (1988).
Section 1915(d) also…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Carl D. Potnick v. Eastern State Hospital, Carl D. Potnick v. Suffolk PoliceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. Charles W. Sears Real Estate, Inc., Dba Sears Real Estate and Charles W. Sears, Appeal of Charles W. SearsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1988
3Cited by2 opinions
- M/V Cheri H. Inc. v. United States Secretary of AgricultureUnited States Court of International Trade · 2005
- Former Employees of Fairchild Semi-Conductor Corp. v. United States Secretary of LaborUnited States Court of International Trade · 2006