Shell v. Henderson et al

Filing 539

ORDER. Document Numbers 523 , 524 , 525 , 526 , and 537 filed by Thomas Dutkiewicz on behalf of Defendant Connecticut DCF Watch are STRICKEN, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 01/30/2012.(wjc, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya Civil Action No. 09–cv–00309-MSK-KMT SUZANNE SHELL, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN FAMILY RIGHTS ASSOCIATION, LEONARD HENDERSON, FAMILIES AT RISK DEFENSE ALLIANCE, FRANCINE RENEE CYGAN, MARK CYGAN, ILLINOIS FAMILY ADVOCACY COALITION, GEORGIA FAMILY RIGHTS, INC., DENNIS HINGER, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY ADVOCATES, CONNECTICUT DCF WATCH, ANN DURAND, BRENDA SWALLOW, KATHY TILLEY, RANDALL BLAIR, LLOYD PHILLIPS, DESERE’ CLABO aka HOWARD, and UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS DOE 1-15, Defendants. ORDER This matter is before the court on a review of several documents filed on behalf of Defendant Connecticut DCF Watch and signed by a former pro se defendant, Thomas Dutkiewicz. It is a “long-standing rule that a corporation must be represented by an attorney to appear in federal court.” Tal v. Hogan, 453 F.3d 1244, 1254 (10th Cir. 2006) (footnote and citations omitted). Moreover, courts “have uniformly held that 28 U.S.C. § 1654, providing that ‘parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel,’ does not allow corporations, partnerships, or associations to appear in federal court otherwise than through a licensed attorney.” Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 202 (1993). Thus, the pleadings filed by Thomas Dutkiewicz, a non-attorney, are not properly before the court and must be stricken. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Document Numbers 523, 524, 525, 526, and 537, filed by Thomas Dutkiewicz on behalf of Defendant Connecticut DCF Watch, are STRICKEN. Dated this 30th day of January, 2012. 2

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?