nor unconditional," however. Village of Tigerton v. Minniecheske, 211 Wis. 2d 777, 785, 565 N.W.2d 586 (Ct. App. 1997). For instance, the right may be limited on a case-by-case basis in response to a pattern of frivolous litigation. See id. Furthermore, the right is not violated by requiring a civil litigant to pay a filing fee, unless the litigant's inability to pay the fee would prevent him from advancing a matter in which some constitutionally recognized fundamental interest is implicated. See United States v. Kras, 409 U.S. 434 (1973) (reversing waiver of prepayment of filing fee in bankruptcy action); Ortwein v. Schwab, 410 U.S. 656 (1973) (approving refusal to waive filing fee for action to challenge reduction of welfare benefits); cf. M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (1996) (<HOLDING>); Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371 (1971)
holding that it is plain error for a trial court to require a defendant to pay courtappointed attorney fees in the absence of legally sufficient evidence that defendant has the ability to pay the amount imposed holding that a trial court commits plain error by imposing courtappointed attorney fees where the record is silent as to the defendants ability to pay the fees ordered holding that a state may not condition appeals from the termination of a persons parental rights on the ability to pay record preparation fees holding that imposition of courtappointed attorney fees is plain error when the record is silent as to the defendants ability to pay the fees ordered holding that attorneys fees for the preparation of the fee application are compensable