“Non- attorney pro se litigants cannot represent other pro se parties.”
How later courts described this case
- “Non- attorney pro se litigants cannot represent other pro se parties.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
CHRISTIAN BRETT MARTINEZ, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
-vs- ) Case No. CIV-21-344-F
)
BOARD OF COMMISSION, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
ORDER
This action was dismissed without prejudice, pursuant to Rule 41(b), Fed. R.
Civ. P., for failure to comply with an order of the court. Judgment was entered on
June 24, 2021. With that judgment, this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action is closed.
The court clerk has received an unsigned three-page document purportedly
from Christian Brett Martinez and has docketed it as a letter. Doc. no. 14. It is
unclear whether the three-page document is intended by Mr. Martinez to commence
a new 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The court declines to treat it as such an action.
The court clerk is DIRECTED to send to Mr. Martinez, at the address he
listed on the envelope, all necessary forms to commence a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action.
If Mr. Martinez wishes to commence a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, he may complete
those forms and send them to the court clerk for filing.
The court advises Mr. Martinez that because he is not a licensed attorney, he
may not bring any 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action on behalf of Jacklyn Elizabeth Sears
Martinez. See, Perry v. Stout, 20 Fed. Appx. 780, 782 (10th Cir. 2001) (“Non-
attorney pro se litigants cannot represent other pro se parties.”) (unpublished
decision cited as persuasive pursuant to 10" Cir. R. 32.1(A)); see also, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1654 (“parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel.”’).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 22" day of March, 2022.
STEPHEN P. FRIOT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
21-0344p004.docx