John Douglas Alexander v. Alan M. Wilson
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR. THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals John Douglas Alexander, Appellant, v. Alan M. Wilson and State, Respondents. Appellate Case No. 2020-000679 Appeal From Spartanburg County Unpublished Opinion No. 2022-UP-139 Submitted February 1, 2022 – Filed March 23, 2022 AFFIRMED John Douglas Alexander, pro se. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, of Columbia, for Respondents. PER CURIAM: John Douglas Alexander appeals an order denying his motion to proceed in forma pauperis and subsequent dismissal of his case. On appeal, he contends (1) his due process rights were violated when he was denied meaningful access to the judicial system and (2) his complaint fit within one of the constitutional exceptions to the filing fee requirement. Because a cause of action for gross negligence does not concern a fundamental right or fit within one of the statutory or constitutional exceptions that entitles an individual to proceed without costs, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Ex Parte Martin, 321 S.C. 533, 535, 471 S.E.2d 134, 135 (1995) ("[M]otions to proceed in forma pauperis may only be granted where specifically authorized by statute or required by constitutional provisions."); id. ("Further, where certain fundamental rights are involved, the Constitution requires that an indigent be allowed access to the courts."). AFFIRMED.1 WILLIAMS, C.J., and KONDUROS and VINSON, JJ., concur. 1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
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.
