10th Cir.

Rothschild v. Sarah Rockefeller Corporation, et al.

July 2, 2026 ·1:25-CV-02086-LTB ·Panel Decision · By Aisha Johnson

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of a pro se prisoner's civil rights complaint without prejudice. The court also denied the appellant's motion to proceed in forma pauperis due to a lack of good faith.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / --:--

Background

Mercier Cardan Walter-Welch Rothschild, a former Colorado state inmate proceeding pro se, filed a complaint under Section nineteen hundred and eighty-three alleging constitutional violations by his public defender, Arapahoe County, the Parole Division of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and a medical group. The district court identified deficiencies in his complaint and his motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ordering him to cure them twice. Rothschild failed to complete the required forms, leading the district court to dismiss the complaint without prejudice and certify that any appeal would not be in good faith.

The court’s reasoning

The Tenth Circuit reviewed the dismissal for abuse of discretion. The court noted that Rothschild failed to raise the issue of why he could not cure the deficiencies before the district court. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the dismissal. Additionally, the court agreed with the district court that Rothschild lacked a good faith basis for appeal because he did not present a nonfrivolous argument.

What it means going forward

The dismissal without prejudice allows Rothschild to refile his complaint in the district court, but he must proceed with the proper forms and address the deficiencies previously noted. The denial of in forma pauperis status means Rothschild must pay the appellate filing fees.