Cowan v. Kansas, State of, Department for Children and Families et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
LATAWNYA DENISE COWAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN
AND FAMILIES and NEBRASKA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Defendants.
Case No. 25-4128-DDC-RES
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff LaTawnya Denise Cowan’s Motion
for Leave to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees. ECF No. 3.1 For the reasons explained below,
the Motion is denied without prejudice to refiling.
28 U.S.C. § 1915 allows courts to authorize commencing a civil action “without
prepayment of fees or security therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit that . . . the person
is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” To succeed on an IFP motion, “the movant
must show a financial inability to pay the required filing fees.” Lister v. Dep’t of Treasury, 408
F.3d 1309, 1312 (10th Cir. 2005). Proceeding IFP “in a civil case is a privilege, not a right—
fundamental or otherwise.” White v. Colorado, 157 F.3d 1226, 1233 (10th Cir. 1998). The
decision to grant or deny IFP status under § 1915 lies within the district court’s sound discretion.
Engberg v. Wyoming, 265 F.3d 1109, 1122 (10th Cir. 2001).
1 The Court liberally construes a pro se party’s filings and holds them to a less
stringent standard than those drafted by lawyers, but the Court does not assume the role of the pro
se party’s advocate. See Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991).
Case 5:25-cv-04128-DDC-RES Document 4 Filed 12/23/25 Page 1 of 3

2
Plaintiff’s present Motion and Affidavit do not establish that she is unable to pay this
District’s filing fee. “[T]he Tenth Circuit has determined that a monthly income that exceeds
monthly expenses even ‘by a few hundred dollars’ is ‘sufficient income to pay the filing fees[.]’
Coon v. Trans Am Fin. Servs., No. 24-4025-DDC-RES, 2024 WL 2091272, at *2 (D. Kan. May 9,
2024) (quoting Brewer v. City of Overland Park Police Dep’t, 24 F. App’x 977, 979 (10th Cir.
2002)). Plaintiff’s Affidavit states that she receives $891 per month in Social Security benefits.
ECF No. 3-1 at 4. The Affidavit also lists various expenses that add up to $470. Based on these
numbers, it appears that Plaintiff’s monthly income exceeds her monthly expenses by $421, an
amount greater than the $405 filing fee.
The Court could recommend denial of the Motion on this basis. However, the undersigned
has previously granted Plaintiff leave to proceed IFP in another case filed this year, Cowan v. KVC
Behavioral Healthcare, Inc. (“KVC”), No. 25-4035-DDC-RES, ECF No. 5 (D. Kan. Apr. 9, 2025).
In Plaintiff’s application filed in KVC, she lists $1,200 in monthly Social Security Disability
Insurance (“SSDI”) payments. Id. at ECF No. 3 at 2. That application also listed significant
monthly expenses that are not reflected in the present Affidavit. See generally id. As but one
example, Plaintiff listed $600 in monthly food expenses in KVC while now listing $200 in monthly
grocery expenses in this case. Additionally, in KVC, Plaintiff disclosed significant credit card debt
that is not listed in the present Affidavit. See id. While it is possible that Plaintiff’s financial
situation has changed since she filed her prior case, it is also possible that Plaintiff’s present
Affidavit is incomplete or that Plaintiff could otherwise explain why she does not have any funds
left at the end of each month. This is why the Court is providing Plaintiff with another opportunity
to establish that she is unable to pay the filing fee. That said, Plaintiff must carefully review all
statements made in an affidavit signed under penalty of perjury and provide additional information
Case 5:25-cv-04128-DDC-RES Document 4 Filed 12/23/25 Page 2 of 3

3
when necessary—for example, explaining why Plaintiff’s SSDI payments appear to have
decreased.
For these reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion is denied without prejudice to refiling, which means
that Plaintiff may refile a motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of fees. On or before
January 16, 2026, Plaintiff must: (1) file a new motion for leave to proceed without prepayment
of fees using the forms provided by the Clerk’s Office: (2) pay the filing fee; or (3) take appropriate
action to dismiss this case. If Plaintiff fails to do any of these things, the Court likely will dismiss
this action without further notice.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed Without
Prepayment of Fees, ECF No. 3, is DENIED without prejudice to refiling on or before January
16, 2026.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk’s Office is directed to mail Plaintiff a clean
copy of this District’s model motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of fees and model
affidavit of financial status.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 23, 2025, at Topeka, Kansas.
/s/ Rachel E. Schwartz
Rachel E. Schwartz
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 5:25-cv-04128-DDC-RES Document 4 Filed 12/23/25 Page 3 of 3