UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
DR. BARRY EPPLEY, MD, DMD,
Entry Concerning Selected Matters
The court, having considered the above action and the matters which are pending,
makes the following rulings:
Defendant has again incorrectly filed a complaint of judicial misconduct in this
action. That document (dkt 61) is stricken from the file and docket in this
action so that it may be forwarded as directed in paragraph 2 of this Entry.
The clerk shall forward the complaint of judicial misconduct received from
the defendant to the Clerk, United States Court of Appeals, Room 2722, 219
S. Dearborn Street, Chicago, IL 60634 with a copy of this Entry.
The defendant’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis with respect
to her appeal from the issuance of the preliminary injunction (dkt 60) is
denied because in the circumstances of this case there is no reasonable
basis on which it could be argued that the issuance of such injunction was
erroneous. Her appeal is therefore taken in bad faith. Lee v. Clinton, 209
F.3d 1025, 1026 (7th Cir. 2000) (“to sue in bad faith means merely to sue on
the basis of a frivolous claim, which is to say a claim that no reasonable
person could suppose to have any merit”).
Insofar as the defendant’s second affidavit (dkt 63) has been submitted to
oppose the defendant’s motion for preliminary injunction, it is both untimely
and inadequate. Insofar as the second affidavit is submitted for the purpose
of the defendant putting on record, unconnected with any pending motion or
evidentiary proceeding, statements and materials pertaining to her medical
condition and/or the claims in this case, it is of no effect.
The defendant’s motion to strike (dkt 62) is denied as untimely, as precluded
by the defendant’s waiver by failing to attend and participate in the hearing
of April 17, 2009, and as unpersuasive.
IT IS SO ORDERED.