Goldstein v. Haband Co.

¶ 1 Heath Goldstein, pro se, seeks review of three separate orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County denying him leave to proceed in forma, pauperis (IFP) in three separate actions. After careful review, we are constrained to agree with Goldstein’s argument that he was not afforded the proper procedures to determine whether he was entitled to proceed in forma pauperis. There are three reasons we reach this conclusion.

¶ 2 First, and most importantly, we find that Lackawanna County Rule of Civil Procedure 295(d) is invalid because it conflicts with our statewide IFP practice…