Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Tucker v. United States Court of Appeals for Tenth Circuit

United States District Court, E.D. Oklahoma

August 5, 2019

Markeith D. Tucker Plaintiff,
v.
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, United States District Court Western District of Oklahoma, Defendants.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          RONALD A WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Before the court are Plaintiff's Complaint [Docket No. 2] and Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs [Docket No. 3].

         Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs

         Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs (“in forma pauperis”) indicates that he is unemployed and seeking disability, does not own real property, has no money in a bank account, and does not own a vehicle. Plaintiff's IFP application is GRANTED.

         Complaint

         The court construes Plaintiff's allegation liberally as he is pro se. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972). Plaintiff filed his Complaint against the Defendants, stating the following:

I have file multiple Civil Lawsuits with United States District Court Western District of Oklahoma for further racial problems, discriminating towards me as Plaintiff and for Officials to do a...Pattern and Practice as well as Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.

         Plaintiff alleges in his Complaint discrimination and deprivation of rights; however, he cites no specific allegations nor requests any relief from the court.

         Plaintiff's arguments are quite similar to what the Tenth Circuit had rejected as the “hackneyed tax protester refrain.” United States v. Chisum, 502 F.3d 1237, 1243 (10th Cir. 2007). Further, Plaintiff's arguments are “completely lacking in legal merit and patently frivolous.” Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1448 (10th Cir. 1990).

         28 U.S.C. § 1915

         Section 1915 of the United States Code, Title 28, states as follows:

(2) Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that-
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.