Grenier v. St. Louis County
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:24-cv-04449
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Grenier v. St. Louis County, Judge Provinzino denied Grenier’s request to appeal without paying filing fees because her appeal lacked identified, nonfrivolous issues.
Barbara Mary Grenier’s request to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal was denied. The order did not decide her underlying claims against St. Louis County or the State of Minnesota.
What happened
In Grenier v. St. Louis County, Barbara Mary Grenier appealed an earlier dismissal of her case and the denial of her request to reopen it. Her notice said she wanted to appeal “everything.”
Grenier also asked to proceed on appeal without paying filing fees. The court explained that she had to identify the issues she intended to appeal and show that the appeal was taken in good faith.
Judge Laura M. Provinzino ruled that Grenier had not identified any appealable issue and that the court could see no reasonable basis for challenging the earlier decisions. The court denied her application to proceed without paying filing fees on appeal.
The detailed version
- Grenier v. St. Louis County · No. 0:24-cv-04449
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Mar. 5, 2025
Background
On January 24, 2025, the Court dismissed Barbara Mary Grenier’s complaint without prejudice after she filed a letter saying she wanted “to put a motion in to not go forward with this case, at this time.” The Court also dismissed her application to proceed without paying the filing fee, commonly called in forma pauperis status, as moot.
Grenier later filed a letter saying that she had not wanted to voluntarily dismiss the case. She asked instead to pause the proceedings while she looked for an attorney. The Court treated that letter as a request to reopen the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), but denied the request.
Grenier then filed a notice of appeal seeking to appeal “everything” and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal.
Court’s analysis
Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(1), a person seeking to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal must first file a motion in the district court and identify the issues intended for appeal. The Court must deny that status if the appeal is not taken in good faith. For this purpose, the Court considered whether the proposed appellate issues were factually or legally frivolous.
The Court concluded that Grenier’s appeal was not taken in good faith. Her notice of appeal identified no specific issue beyond saying that she wanted to appeal “everything.” The Court therefore found that she had not shown any potentially meritorious issue. The Court added that, even if she intended to appeal the dismissal of her case or the denial of her request to reopen it, the Court could find no reasonable basis for either appeal.
The Court explained that it had dismissed the case after Grenier requested not to proceed and had refused to reopen it merely to pause the case while she sought an attorney. The Court also stated that, if Grenier later found an attorney and wanted to continue pursuing her claims, she could file a new complaint.
Disposition
Judge Laura M. Provinzino denied Grenier’s application to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal. The order did not decide the underlying claims against St. Louis County or the State of Minnesota.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.