| 
		  
		Pro Bono Attorneys DeskbookWho Will Pay the Costs?
 Proceeding
		In Forma Pauperis
 
		  Likely your pro 
		bono client will not have the means for pay court costs and fees.  
		This inability should not keep your client from accessing the justice 
		system.   In Forma Pauperis 
		Proceedings in State Courts   The right of an 
		individual to have access to our court system, regardless of income 
		level, was well-established in Missouri before it joined the union and 
		became a state. In fact, an in forma pauperis statute was 
		one of Missouri's first enacted laws after admittance to the union. This 
		right was further guaranteed in Article 1, § 14 of the Missouri 
		Constitution, where it has remained unchanged. Over the years, the 
		Missouri legislature has tried to address the practical realities of 
		giving the poor access to the courts. Their current response is found in 
		§ 514.040.   Christine E. Rollins, “Statutory Assistance for Attorneys 
		Providing Pro Bono Services”, 60 Mo Bar Journal, May-June 2004, p 112 
		[footnotes omitted]. Extensive 
		reference is made to the above cited article by Christine E. Rollins.
		It is an excellent discussion of the in forma pauperis 
		procedure.  You may wish to read the 
		
		whole article.
 Section
		
		514.040, RSMo sets forth the in forma pauperis procedure.  Also 
		see Civil Rule
		
		77.03.   An OSCA (Office of 
		State Courts Administration) approved
		
		Motion and Affidavit in Support of Request to Proceed as a Poor Person 
		is in this deskbook forms library.
 The OSCA form does 
		not include sheriff’s service costs or publication costs.  These costs 
		should be specifically mentioned in the application, if appropriate to 
		your client’s case.   How does the 
		application proceed?   First, § 
		514.040(1) establishes a procedure for a client is to file a motion to 
		proceed in forma pauperis. In most cases, the courts will act 
		within their discretion and rule on the motion without requiring a 
		hearing. On the rare occasion that a court wishes to hold an evidentiary 
		hearing, it is a two-stage process. Initially, the hearing is set to 
		determine petitioner's status as an indigent. The court may 
		require an affidavit from the petitioner setting out particulars of his 
		or her current financial condition. The court may require affidavits 
		from others or "adopt some similar procedure to discover plaintiff's 
		true financial [state]." After the client is deemed "poor," the court 
		examines the "petition to see if it is patently and irreparably 
		frivolous or malicious on its face so that, as pleaded, [movant] could 
		prove no set of facts entitling him to relief." If the court deems the 
		action to be frivolous or malicious, petitioner is not allowed to 
		proceed. Rollins, id [footnotes omitted]. What costs are 
		included if in forma pauperis status is granted? Filing fees, 
		personal service attempts, service by publication related costs, and 
		transcripts and legal files requested to pursue appeals on behalf of 
		indigent clients are now specifically enumerated as falling within the 
		meaning of § 514.040, RSMo.   Once the client 
		has been determined to be indigent, the statute allows for the person to 
		have "all necessary process and proceedings as in other cases, without 
		fees, tax or charge as the court determines the person cannot pay."
		Since the inception of the statute, the courts have struggled to 
		define "necessary process and proceedings." The legislature did not 
		enumerate specific items or give guidance as to what would fall within 
		the scope of that term. However, Missouri law does require that "words 
		and phrases [of statutes] be taken in their plain or ordinary and usual 
		sense." Therefore, the courts have found that filing fees should be 
		waived for those determined to be indigent.   Filing the motion 
		to proceed in forma pauperis may seem more trouble than it is 
		worth to get a filing fee waived. Although these fees, and others, may 
		seem nominal to most of us in the legal community, even these minimal 
		amounts in many cases keep clients from pursuing actions pro se 
		or contacting an attorney. If a client does request our services, and we 
		are inclined to assist them, filing this motion will allow us to file 
		their case free of charge. The waiving of this nominal fee, in and of 
		itself, may open the doors of justice to additional members of our 
		communities.    The courts have 
		also found that the costs of service are "necessary process and 
		proceedings" that must be waived for poor people. Law enforcement, once 
		presented with notice from the court that the petitioner can proceed 
		in forma pauperis, are bound to try and attempt personal service on 
		the opposing party without payment of a fee. This holds true for all 
		county sheriff's departments throughout the state of Missouri. It has 
		been my experience that even some out-of-state service requests will be 
		honored free of charge, depending upon the department; however, they 
		have no obligation to do so.    If personal 
		service cannot be perfected, the next step, in most cases, is service by 
		publication. The court of appeals, in State ex rel. Taylor v. Clymer, 
		was faced with the question as to whether service by publication fell 
		within the "necessary process and proceedings" meaning of § 514.040. 
		"Respondents contend[ed] that relators [had] received complete access to 
		the court because they [had] been allowed to file their actions as poor 
		persons" and did not have to pay the filing fees. In addition, 
		respondents argued that "the State [was] not further obligated to expand 
		relators' rights by affording them services of process by publication 
		without cost." The court disagreed. The court determined that "service 
		accomplishes the fact of jurisdiction and not the filing" of the 
		petition. The court held that service was within the meaning of the 
		necessary process and proceedings language of § 514.040. Since service 
		by publication was required to continue with the cause of action, the 
		court held that "the order of publication should be issued without cost 
		to relators under the mandate of our statutes and the policy of this 
		State to provide indigents free access to our courts." 
		   In a more recent 
		case, State ex rel. Holterman v. Patterson, the court of appeals 
		was asked to rule on whether guardian ad litem fees fell within § 
		514.040. Relator was required to pay one-third of a $1,000 guardian 
		ad litem fee. Relator argued that she should not be required to pay 
		the fee under § 514.040 because she was indigent and could not pay costs 
		and fees "related to the prosecution of the suit." Relator had filed a 
		motion with the trial court to join the county as a third party and 
		order fees paid out of public funds. The court reasoned that since it 
		had been determined that relator was "unable to pay the costs, fees and 
		expenses necessary to prosecute or defend the action," § 514.040 leaves 
		no discretion for the trial judge to assess the guardian ad litem 
		fee against relator. The county was required to pay the fees assessed 
		against relator.    In two recent 
		decisions, the Court of Appeals, Eastern District has identified 
		additional items covered by § 514.040. First, pursuant to a writ of 
		mandamus, State ex rel. Wecker v. Ohmer, May 6, 2003 (Wecker I), 
		the court considered whether relator was entitled "to obtain a 
		transcript of her termination of parental rights trial." Relator filed a 
		timely appeal and a "certificate of . . . inability to pay cost, fees 
		and expenses" indicating that she was proceeding as a poor person. In 
		addition, she filed a request for the transcript in the trial court. 
		Respondent denied her request for a trial transcript. Respondent argued 
		that since relator had been represented by private counsel during the 
		trial, she was not allowed to request the trial transcript as a poor 
		person. The court was unpersuaded by this argument, since the trial 
		attorney filed an affidavit with the court stating that he represented 
		relator on a pro bono basis. The court found that "Section 
		514.040.3 specifically allows for 'private counsel working on behalf of 
		or under the auspices of [a legal aid] society.'" The court ordered the 
		production of the trial transcript, noting that Missouri statutes 
		provided for court costs in termination of parental rights cases in § 
		211.462.4: "Court costs shall be paid by the county in which the 
		proceeding is instituted, except that the court may require the agency 
		or person having received legal or actual custody to pay the costs."
		   On June 10, 2003, 
		the Eastern District issued a second opinion in the matter, Wecker II, 
		stating that for the same reasons used in Wecker I, the relator 
		should not be required to pay to have the legal file prepared in order 
		to pursue her appeal. Respondent had argued that the state was not 
		required to pay for preparation of the legal file. The court found that 
		preparation of the legal file fell within the meaning of § 514.040. 
		Respondent was directed to enter all orders necessary to prepare and 
		release the legal file to relator.    Although filing 
		fees, in personal service attempts, service by publication related 
		costs, and transcripts and legal files requested to pursue appeals on 
		behalf of indigent clients are now specifically enumerated as falling 
		within the meaning of § 514.040, this most likely is not an inclusive 
		list. Consistently, the appellate courts are finding that if the 
		requested item is something that a litigant is required by law to file, 
		proceed in the prosecution of, or defend a suit against, payment will 
		not be required if a party is deemed to be indigent. Rollins, id. 
		[footnotes omitted, emphasis supplied]   A special statute 
		Section
		
		514.040.3, RSMo gives
		
		Legal Services authority to determine poverty status.  Once that 
		certification is granted by Legal Services, the court must approve 
		payment of all costs.  State of Missouri ex rel. Tressa Holterman, 
		relator, v. Hon. Timothy J. Patterson, resp., No. ED78148, 24 S.W.3d 
		784 (Mo. App. 2000). The most recent 
		amendment to § 514.040 became effective on August 28, 1999, when 
		subsection 3 was added. It allows for a legal aid society, a legal 
		services or other non-profit organization, which has as its primary 
		purpose to provide legal services to indigent persons, to certify that a 
		client is indigent within the meaning of the statute. The certificate 
		issued by the non-profit agency certifies to the court that the party 
		has been determined by the agency's standards to be "unable to pay the 
		costs, fees and expenses necessary to prosecute or defend the action." 
		The appellate courts have determined that once a party has been 
		certified by one of these agencies, trial courts have no discretion in 
		the matter and must accept the person as "poor." Private counsel, who 
		work on behalf of or under the auspices of such non-profits, would be 
		allowed to utilize the certificate that the non-profit provides on 
		behalf of their clients. Therefore, if attorneys contact and volunteer 
		to take cases from their local legal services offices, they obtain all 
		the benefits under § 514.040 without having to work through the 
		evidentiary hearing otherwise required. Rollins, id. [footnotes omitted]   The foregoing 
		discussion focuses on in forma pauperis proceedings in state 
		trial courts in civil matters since that is the most frequent forum for
		pro bono matters.  Similar procedures are available in adult 
		abuse cases (see Section 455.025, RSMo), state court appeals (Rule 81.04).   
		In Forma Pauperis Proceedings in Federal Courts 
		  
		In forma pauperis 
		proceedings are authorized in federal courts by 28 U.S.C. § 1915.  The 
		two-step process requires first a determination of whether the plaintiff 
		qualifies by economic status and second a determination of whether the 
		cause of action is frivolous or malicious.  Martin-Trigona v. Stewart, 
		691 F.2d 856 (8th Cir. 1982). 
		  
		The statute divides civil plaintiffs into two categories, those 
		who are prisoners and those who are not.  For those parties who are 
		prisoners obtaining in forma pauperis certification is somewhat more 
		complicated.  The law requires payment of installments from the 
		prisoner's inmate trust fund account.  The statute also may disqualify 
		those from in forma pauperis consideration if they have filed three 
		prior frivolous lawsuits.  28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).            This 
		discussion will focus on those parties who are not prisoners.  If the 
		party is a prisoner it is suggested that 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and the 
		district court local rules be reviewed carefully to determine all of the 
		requirements for obtaining in forma pauperis status. 
		  
		For non-prisoner parties the process to initiate an in forma 
		pauperis authorization is similar to that in state court.  Most district 
		courts require the filing of a motion or application, affidavit of the 
		party, and the proposed complaint to be filed in the case.  The 
		affidavit of the party should include all assets and income available to 
		the party and establish that the individual is unable to pay for fees in 
		the action.  The affidavit should also state the nature of the action, 
		defense, or appeal that the party is seeking to redress.  28 U.S.C. § 
		1915(a)(1). 
		  
		The local U.S. District Court rules should be consulted before 
		filing an in forma pauperis action.  Eastern District Rule 3-2.05 
		requires that the party file an application accompanied by an affidavit 
		form provided by the court.  The 
		
		required form is available from the Eastern District web site. 
		The rule also requires any person granted in forma pauperis status to 
		promptly notify the court in writing of changes in their financial 
		status.  Western District Rule 83.7 also requires a party to file, along 
		with the application and complaint, an affidavit on a form provided by 
		the court (or other affidavit providing similar information).  
		This form 
		is also available from the Western District web site.The Western District Rule also allows the court to require payment 
		of a partial filing fee or installment payments, Rule 83.7(a)(4).  If 
		the court orders that a full or partial filing fee is required the 
		party is granted 30 days to comply or the case can be dismissed.  Rule 
		83.7(a)(6) also allows for the court to review the in forma pauperis 
		status from time to time and require a party to make payment of a fee if 
		the party becomes capable of paying. 
		  
		As noted above, it is important for the in forma pauperis applicant 
		to make a complete disclosure of all assets, income, and any other facts 
		relevant to the applicant's financial status and ability to pay.  If 
		the court later determines that full information was not provided, the 
		court has the authority not only to rescind the in forma pauperis 
		status, but to also dismiss the case with prejudice.  28 U.S.C. § 
		1915(e)(2); Romesburg v. Trickey, 908 F.2d 258 (8th 
		Cir. 1990). 
		  
		If in forma pauperis status is granted, “the officers of the court 
		shall issue and serve all process, and perform all duties in such 
		cases.  Witnesses shall attend as in other cases, and the same remedies 
		shall be available as are provided for by law in other cases.”  28 U.S.C. 
		§ 1915(d).  In addition, the statute allows the court to require a 
		record on appeal or transcript of proceedings to be prepared at no 
		expense to the party.  28 U.S.C. § 1915(c).  Other expenses are 
		generally not covered by in forma pauperis status.  Manning v. Tefft, 
		839 F. Supp. 126 (D. R.I. 1994)(Transportation expenses denied.);  
		Wright v. U.S., 948 F. Supp. 61 (M.D. Fla. 1996)(Deposition costs 
		denied.);  Pedraza v. Jones, 71 F.3d 194 (5th  Cir. 
		1995)(Expert witness costs denied.);  Malik v. Lavalley, 994 F.2d 
		90 (2d Cir. 1993)(Witness fees denied.).  In United States Marshals 
		Service v. Means, 741 F.2d 1053 (8th Cir. 1984) the court 
		held that § 1915(d) did not allow for the payment of witness fees to 
		compel the attendance of witnesses.  However, after construing a number 
		of federal statutes and rules, the court found discretionary authority 
		to require the Marshals Service to pay witness fees when the United 
		States is an opposing party to the action. 
		  
		Thanks to 
		James 
		Smith, Legal Aid of Western Missouri, Kansas City, MO for the above 
		discussion of federal in forma pauperis procedure. 
		  For 
		appropriate forms for proceedings in forma pauperis  in federal
		
		appeals courts and
		
		bankruptcy proceedings click the underscored key word.    
		How is poverty 
		measured? Probably the most frequently used benchmark for measuring personal 
		poverty is the guidelines annually published by the
		
		U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
		
		Click here for a chart showing based on the HHS guidelines showing 
		poverty level by household size by year and month from 100% to 200% of 
		poverty.
 Each agency will 
		apply the HHS guidelines in their own way.  Legal Services eligibility 
		is based on 125% of poverty.  Samaritan Center Legal Care uses 150% of 
		poverty as a threshold for eligibility.     
		
		  |