IN RE: MARTHA AKERS, No. 1:2012cv01853 - Document 10 (D.D.C. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 1/25/13. (ms, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ : In re: : Martha A. Akers, : Debtor, : : : MARTHA A. AKERS, : : Appellant, : : v. : Civil Action No. 12-1853 (JEB) : BEAL BANK, et al., : : Appellees. : _________________________________________ : MEMORANDUM OPINION On January 7, 2013, this Court issued a Minute Order noting Appellant s failure to pay either the $298.00 fee for the filing of her Notice of Appeal in the Bankruptcy Court or the $350.00 filing fee for this civil action. The Court, accordingly, ordered Appellant either to pay those fees or to apply for leave to proceed without prepayment of fees. See Minute Order of Jan. 7, 2013. Instead, on January 22, 2013, Appellant filed a pleading entitled Motion to Stay Pending Petition for Writ of Certiorari, which is, like many of her pleadings, largely incomprehensible. She adverts to her hardship and an inability to prepay the costs, but also veers into non sequiturs about malicious prosecution, the personal bias or prejudice of the Bankruptcy Court, and a connection between a demand for a jury trial and a litigation tactic. Id. at 1-2. Appellant is a prolific filer in this and other courts and knows full well what an application to proceed without prepayment of fees (or in forma pauperis petition) is, as she has filed the same in other cases, as recently as last month. See In re: Akers, No. 12-1137, ECF No. 6 (IFP Application). Perhaps because that one was denied by this Court, see ECF No. 7, she is hesitant to file one here. In any event, as she has neither paid the fees nor articulated any basis for granting the relief she requests, her motion will be denied and this appeal dismissed. An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. DATE: January 25, 2013 JAMES E. BOASBERG United States District Judge
]]>
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.
