statutory prerequisites to the filing of In Forma Pauperis lawsuits by inmates set forth in Chapter 14 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Plaintiff's arguments to the contrary, are not supported by any citation to any authority whatsoever. Likewise without legal support are plaintiffs assertions that the defendant was required under Chapter 14 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code to furnish plaintiff with legal advice regarding the precise nature of each and every defect in plaintiffs submissions, and specific directions for how to cure same. Nothing in Chapter 14 or Rule 24, Tex.R.Civ.P., mandated that the defendant furnish plaintiff with legal advice of that nature. 86 . See docket entry nos. 22 and 23. 87 . See Grissom v. Scott, 934 F.2d 656, 657 (5th Cir.1991), (<HOLDING>). 88 . See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25,
holding that dismissal of a complaint pursuant to former  1915d now  1915e is not appropriate where a plaintiff has made a partial payment of filing fees and that in such cases the court must treat the complaint in the same manner as one for which in forma pauperis status has not been granted holding that because the plaintiff had not perfected service within 120 days of filing the complaint the complaint was subject to mandatory dismissal holding that a motion to proceed in forma pauperis is dispositive because it is the functional equivalent of an involuntary dismissal holding that complaint on appeal must be the same as that presented in the trial court holding that the financial responsibility provisions of the plra require a prisoner seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis to file an affidavit listing his assets and to submit a certified copy of his inmate trust fund account statement or an institutional equivalent reflecting the sixmonth period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint even with regard to a case in which in forma pauperis status was granted prior to the effective date of the plra ie april 26 1996