Alan Onstad v. Mary Wilkinson, No. 13-2760 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil Case - civil rights. Pre-service dismissal with prejudice of complaint asserting that denial of in forma pauperis status in state court prevented state conditions-of-confinement case is summarily affirmed. [ October 21, 2013
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-2760 ___________________________ Alan Cole Onstad lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Mary Ann Wilkinson, Clerk, Circuit Court, Lee County, Arkansas; Richard L. Proctor, Circuit Judge, Lee County, Arkansas; Lee County Arkansas lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena ____________ Submitted: October 9, 2013 Filed: October 22, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Alan Onstad appeals the district court s1 preservice dismissal, with prejudice, of his amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, essentially asserting that he was wrongfully denied in forma pauperis (IFP) status in state court, which prevented him from bringing a conditions-of-confinement case in state court. Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (in civil action in which prisoner seeks redress from governmental entity or officer or employee of governmental entity, court shall review complaint as soon as practicable and dismiss it if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state claim, or seeks monetary relief from defendant who is immune); see also Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (de novo review of § 1915A dismissal). Specifically, we agree with the district court that Onstad s complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See Williams v. McKenzie, 834 F.2d 152, 153-54 (8th Cir. 1987) (stating general rule that IFP litigant s access to court is matter of privilege, not of right); cf. Murray v. Dosal, 150 F.3d 814, 817 (8th Cir. 1998) (per curiam) (noting that Supreme Court has never recognized unlimited rule that indigent plaintiffs at all times and in all cases have right to relief without payment of fees). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Onstad s motion for appointment of counsel. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable D.P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
