Gofan v. State of Minnesota
- David Doty
- 0:25-cv-02078
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Gofan v. State of Minnesota, Judge Doty denied Gofan’s request to appeal without prepaying fees because the appeal was frivolous and not in good faith.
Saye Henry Gofan, Jr.’s request to appeal without prepaying the filing fee was denied; the order concerned the appeal rather than deciding the underlying claims.
What happened
In Gofan v. State of Minnesota, Saye Henry Gofan, Jr. asked to appeal without paying the filing fee upfront. The court found that his application showed he could not afford the full fee.
The court nevertheless explained that a fee waiver for an appeal must be denied when the appeal is not pursued in good faith. An appeal is not in good faith when its claims have no reasonable basis in law or fact. The court relied on its earlier order dismissing Gofan’s case and found that his appeal was frivolous.
Judge David S. Doty denied Gofan’s application to appeal without prepaying fees. The order did not explain the underlying reasons for the earlier dismissal beyond referring to that prior order.
The detailed version
- Gofan v. State of Minnesota · No. 0:25-cv-02078
- David Doty
- June 25, 2025
Background
The court considered Saye Henry Gofan, Jr.’s application to proceed without prepaying the filing fee for his appeal. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a), a person may request this status, commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis, by showing that he cannot afford the full filing fee.
Financial eligibility
The application indicated that Gofan did not have enough monthly income or savings to pay the full filing fee. The court therefore found that he appeared financially eligible to proceed without prepaying the fee.
Good-faith requirement
Financial eligibility alone was not enough. The court explained that it must deny this status if the appeal is not taken in good faith. The court used an objective standard: an appeal is frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact.
The court referred to its earlier order dismissing Gofan’s case, identified as ECF No. 5, and found that Gofan’s appeal was frivolous. It therefore concluded that the appeal was not taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
Disposition
The court denied Gofan’s application to appeal without prepaying fees, identified as ECF No. 11. The opinion does not state the underlying claims or give the reasons for the earlier dismissal beyond referring to the prior order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.