Legal Opinion
Cotto v. Tennis
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided March 4, 2010No. 09-4419PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
Luis Cotto appeals pro se from the District Court’s order denying his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). We will affirm. See 3d Cir. LAR 27.4 (2008); 3d Cir. I.O.P. 10.6.
Cotto instituted this action by submitting a petition for a writ of habeas corpus to the District Court along with a motion for leave to proceed IFP. The filing fee for the habeas petition is $5.00. See 28 U.S.C. *322§ 1914(a). A Magistrate Judge recommended that the District Court deny the IFP motion because Cotto’s prison account statement showed an average monthly balance of $56.43, which “far…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- Adkins v. E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Melvin P. Deutsch v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- Donald Sylvester Jones v. Charles H. Zimmerman, Superintendent, and Leroy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General of PennsylvaniaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Redmond v. GillCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2003
4Cited by15 opinions
- DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE - TRANSFERRED TO CAMDEN - CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-cv-2849District Court, D. New Jersey · 2023
- DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE -TRANSFERRED TO CAMDEN NEW CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-cv-4485District Court, D. New Jersey · 2023
- Arunachalam v. McNamaraCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2021
- BORNSTEIN v. MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2024
- CHRUSTOWSKI v. ARCHER & GREINERDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2024
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.