BURROUGHS et al v. HILL et al

Filing 43

ORDER Denying 42 MOTION for Extension of Time to File OBJECTION as to 37 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 6 Amended Complaint/Petition filed by TORRES ANTWAN BURROUGHS and Striking 41 Objection to Report and Recommendations, filed by TORRES ANTWAN BURROUGHS Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE TILMAN E SELF, III on 05/19/2023. (elp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION TORRES ANTWAN BURROUGHS, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:22-cv-00272-TES-TQL v. FNU HILL, et al., Defendants. ORDER On May 19, 2023, Plaintiff Torres Burroughs “filed” Objections [Doc. 41] to the magistrate judge’s Recommendation, along with a Motion for Extension of Time to File Objections [Doc. 42]. However, both documents were signed by someone other than Plaintiff. See [Doc. 41, p. 4 (signed “by POA”)]; [Doc. 42 (same)]. Even more, the filings were mailed from “S. Burroughs” at 6 Mossy Court, “Sav’h, GA” 31419. [Doc. 41-10]. Plaintiff, however, is currently housed at Wilcox State Prison in Abbeville, Georgia. [Doc. 35]; [Doc. 36]. It is black-letter law that a non-lawyer cannot represent someone in a legal proceeding. That includes those purporting to act under power of attorney. Jacox v. Dep’t of Def., No. 5:06CV182 HL, 2007 WL 118102, at *1 (M.D. Ga. Jan. 10, 2007) (“By its own terms [28 U.S.C.] § 1654 requires those persons who seek to represent themselves in federal courts to do so ‘personally,’ thereby foreclosing on the possibility that such representation could occur by proxy.”); Brown v. Great N. Ins. Co., No. 2:14-CV-00015RWS, 2015 WL 898357, at *10 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 3, 2015) (“Consequently, the existence of a power of attorney does not authorize a non-lawyer to conduct legal proceedings on behalf of a pro se litigant[.]”). Further, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires each pleading filed in a federal court to be signed personally by the party representing themselves. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. Rule 11 further instructs courts to strike a document that is improperly signed. Accordingly, the Court STRIKES Plaintiff’s Objections [Doc. 41]. As to Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Objections, the Court previously granted Plaintiff additional time to file his objections. See [Doc. 40 (extending the deadline for objections to May 29, 2023)]. Therefore, the Court DENIES Plaintiff Motion for Extension of Time [Doc. 42]. Plaintiff must file any objections on or before May 29, 2023. SO ORDERED, this 19th day of May, 2023. S/ Tilman E. Self, III TILMAN E. SELF, III, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 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?