UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 10, 2011
CHRISTINE K. GOLDSMITH, JUDGE, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS JUSTICE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, DEFENDANT.
D.C. No. 11-cv-1473 MMA (CAB)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Michael M. Anello United States District Judge
ORDER REVOKING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS
On July 19, 2011, the Court dismissed Plaintiff Esmaeil Farshi's action against Defendant Christine K. Goldsmith, a San Diego Superior Court Judge, because Judge Goldsmith enjoyed absolute judicial immunity. [Doc. No. 3.] Plaintiff contends this dismissal was in error, and has appealed the Court's decision. On August 8, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals referred this matter to the undersigned for the limited purpose of determining whether Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status should continue for the appeal in this action or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith. [Doc. No. 9 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); see also Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002) (revocation of in forma pauperis status is appropriate where district court finds the appeal to be frivolous).]
In dismissing Plaintiff's complaint, the Court found Plaintiff's allegations were based on the conduct of a judge acting within the scope of her judicial authority, and such conduct entitled her to absolute immunity from suit. [Doc. No. 3]; see also Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 1075 (9th Cir.1986) (en banc). Based on these prior findings, Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status should not continue for the appeal because the Court finds the appeal "lack[s] an arguable basis either in law or fact." See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Accordingly, Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status is hereby REVOKED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.