Michigan First Credit Union v. Smith (In re Smith)
Docket: Bankruptcy No. 12-51813; Adversary No. 12-5492
Court: United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan; July 8, 2013; Us Bankruptcy; United States Bankruptcy Court
Defendant Barbara Jean Smith's application to proceed in forma pauperis for her appeal to the district court regarding three bankruptcy court orders has been denied. The Court assumes it has the authority under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a) to grant such applications, but finds Smith’s appeal lacks good faith, as defined by 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3). The good faith standard, which is objective, requires that the appeal is not frivolous and presents a substantial question. The Court concluded that the appeal is frivolous and does not meet the good faith requirement, aligning with precedents that emphasize the legal merit of the issues on appeal. Consequently, the Court denied the application and certified to the district court that the appeal is not taken in good faith. Additionally, there is a noted split of authority regarding the applicability of 28 U.S.C. 1915(a) to bankruptcy courts, with some courts asserting it does not apply while others disagree. In re Meuli, 162 B.R. 327 (Bankr.D.Kan.1993) and In re Laurence Lee Keiswetter, Case No. 86-4385-R (D.Kan. Oct. 30, 1987) confirm that 28 U.S.C. § 1915, regarding in forma pauperis proceedings, applies to bankruptcy appeals. Additionally, Nieves v. Melendez (In re Melendez), 153 B.R. 386 (Bankr.D.Conn.1993), clarifies that § 1915(a) does not prohibit bankruptcy judges from ruling on in forma pauperis motions. Shumate v. Signet Bank, NCNB (In re Shumate), 91 B.R. 23 (Bankr.W.D.Va.1988), supports this by affirming that bankruptcy courts are considered "courts of the United States" under § 1915(a), thus granting them the authority to act in these matters.