From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Webb v. Vratil

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Apr 14, 2010
372 F. App'x 909 (10th Cir. 2010)

Summary

dismissing as frivolous under Section 1915 claims seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against federal judge because equitable relief was precluded by availability of appeal in concurrent action

Summary of this case from Liviz v. Chief Judge Jeffrey R. Howard

Opinion

No. 09-3371.

April 14, 2010.

Stewart Anthony Webb, Independence, MO, pro se.

Before MURPHY, GORSUCH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.


ORDER AND JUDGMENT

After examining appellant's brief and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed.R.App.P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.


Stewart A. Webb filed suit against the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, and against Kathryn Vratil, in her official capacity as the Chief Judge of that court. In a thorough sixpage order, the district court denied Mr. Webb's request to proceed in forma pauperis, concluding that the lawsuit was legally frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Accordingly, the district court dismissed the case without prejudice to the filing of a prepaid complaint.

Mr. Webb appeals this decision and seeks permission to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. For substantially the same reasons set out by the district court in its order, this court concludes that this appeal is frivolous or malicious. See also Price v. Vratil, 365 Fed.Appx. 976, 977 (10th Cir. 2010) (unpublished) (reaching same result in similar appeal with similar complaint). Accordingly, we hereby dismiss this appeal and deny the request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) ("[T]he court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines . . . the . . . appeal is frivolous or malicious.").


Summaries of

Webb v. Vratil

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Apr 14, 2010
372 F. App'x 909 (10th Cir. 2010)

dismissing as frivolous under Section 1915 claims seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against federal judge because equitable relief was precluded by availability of appeal in concurrent action

Summary of this case from Liviz v. Chief Judge Jeffrey R. Howard
Case details for

Webb v. Vratil

Case Details

Full title:Stewart A. WEBB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kathryn H. VRATIL, in her…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: Apr 14, 2010

Citations

372 F. App'x 909 (10th Cir. 2010)

Citing Cases

Webb v. Vratil

Case No. 09-CV-2603-FJG, Doc. 9, Order Denying Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Webb v. Vratil,…

Liviz v. Chief Judge Jeffrey R. Howard

Here, the district judges' rulings have been challenged in pending appeals to the First Circuit, and the…