Crim v. Management & Training Corp. et al
Filing
56
ORDER DENYING 55 Change of Address to Attorney's Office; ORDER DENYING Substitution of Attorneys; ORDER for Plaintiff to File Notice of Change of Address Within Thirty (30) Days; and ORDER Directing Clerk to Mail Change of Address Form and Copy of This Order to Plaintiff at Two Addresses, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 4/18/2012. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
JOHN MICHAEL CRIM,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
MANAGEMENT & TRAINING CORP., )
et al.,
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
____________________________________)
1:09-cv-02041-AWI-GSA-PC
ORDER DENYING CHANGE OF
ADDRESS TO ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
(Doc. 55.)
ORDER DENYING SUBSTITUTION OF
ATTORNEYS
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE
NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS
WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO MAIL
CHANGE OF ADDRESS FORM AND
COPY OF THIS ORDER TO PLAINTIFF
AT TWO ADDRESSES
20
21
I.
BACKGROUND
22
John Michael Crim ("Plaintiff") is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights
23
action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff filed the complaint
24
commencing this action on November 20, 2001. (Doc. 1.)
25
On April 16, 2012, Plaintiff filed a notice requesting the Court to change his address of record
26
from: FDC-Philadelphia, P.O. Box 562, Philadelphia, PA 19106, to: c/o Joseph A. DiRuzzo III,
27
Attorney at Law, Fuerst Ittleman, PL, 1001 Brickell Bay Dr., 32nd Floor, Miami, FL 33131. (Doc. 55.)
28
1
1
II.
SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYS
2
Plaintiff has not indicated whether he intends to substitute attorney Joseph A. DiRuzzo III to
3
represent him in this action. However, should this be the case, Plaintiff may not substitute an attorney
4
in this manner. Plaintiff is presently proceeding in propria persona.1 For Plaintiff to substitute an
5
attorney in place of himself as attorney of record, Plaintiff must submit a substitution of attorneys
6
document to the Court, setting forth the full name and address of the new attorney, and signed by
7
Plaintiff (as the withdrawing attorney and client) and the new attorney. Local Rule 182(g). “All
8
substitutions of attorneys shall require the approval of the Court, and the words ‘IT IS SO ORDERED’
9
with spaces designated for the date and signature of the Judge affixed at the end of each substitution of
10
attorneys.” Id. Therefore, to the extent that Plaintiff’s notice of change of address is a request for
11
substitution of attorneys, the request must be denied.
12
13
II.
CHANGE OF ADDRESS TO ADDRESS OTHER THAN PRO SE LITIGANT’S
ACTUAL ADDRESS
14
In the event that Plaintiff intends to retain his in propria persona status and continue representing
15
himself, he may not change his address of record at the Court to someone else’s address. There is no
16
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure or Local Rule allowing service of Court and other legal documentation
17
at an address other than a pro se litigant’s actual address. Local Rule 131, Local Rule 182(f), and Local
18
Rule 183(b) require pro se litigants to inform the Court of their addresses and to keep the Court informed
19
of any change in their addresses. There is no authority for the proposition that a pro se litigant can
20
simply request the Court to serve him at a different address.
21
There may be special circumstances in which the Court could serve a pro se litigant at a separate
22
address. However, no such special circumstances are apparent here. Moreover, service at a location
23
other than Plaintiff’s place of residence can pose significant problems with ensuring that Plaintiff
24
receives all court documentation, meets court deadlines and prepares and signs all of his own legal
25
documentation as a party proceeding in pro se.
26
1
27
A litigant proceeding in propria persona, or pro se, is one who represents himself in a court proceeding without the
assistance of a lawyer. Black’s Law Dictionary, 1256, 1258 (8th ed. 2004).
28
2
1
The court docket shows that mail sent to Plaintiff at his current address of record was returned
2
to the Court on April 12, 2012 as undeliverable. Therefore, the Clerk of Court shall be directed to send
3
Plaintiff a change-of-address form. Plaintiff is required to complete and return the form to the Court
4
within thirty days, notifying the Court of his address of actual residence. Plaintiff is cautioned that pro
5
se litigants are required to notify the Clerk and all other parties of any change of address, and absent such
6
notice, service of documents at the prior address of the party shall be fully effective. See Local Rule
7
182(f). Moreover, Plaintiff’s failure to comply with an order or any Local Rule may be grounds for
8
dismissal of the entire action. See Local Rule 110.
9
III.
CONCLUSION
10
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
11
1.
12
The substitution of attorney Joseph A. DiRuzzo III in place of Plaintiff, as Plaintiff’s
attorney of record, is DENIED;
13
2.
14
Plaintiff’s request to change his address of record at the Court to that of attorney Joseph
A. DiRuzzo III is DENIED;
15
3.
16
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to:
(a)
Mail a copy of this order and a change-of-address form to Plaintiff at both of the
17
following addresses:
18
(1)
John Michael Crim
04554-063
FDC-Philadelphia
P.O. Box 562
Philadelphia, PA 19106
(2)
John Michael Crim
c/o Joseph A. DiRuzzo III, Attorney at Law
Fuerst Ittleman, PL
1001 Brickell Bay Dr., 32nd Floor
Miami, FL 33131.
19
20
21
22
23
24
4.
25
Within thirty days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff is required to file a notice
of change of address, notifying the Court of his address of actual residence; and
26
///
27
///
28
3
1
5.
2
Plaintiff's failure to comply with this order shall result in a recommendation that this
action be dismissed.
3
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
Dated:
6i0kij
April 18, 2012
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?