Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00130/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00130-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

 A power of attorney, while giving some right to act on behalf of another outside of

court, does not give one the right to represent another in court.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VICTORIA CASTRO, et al., 

Plaintiff, CIV-S-05-0130 DFL GGH PS

vs.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 

Defendant. ORDER

 /

On January 21, 2005, plaintiffs filed a document styled “Notice of Action” with

this court. It included several attachments showing that plaintiffs designated Lamont A. Houze,

II (“Houze”) as their “agent” or “attorney in fact” to act on their behalf pursuing “claims against

the State of California regarding the flood of the neighborhood of Strawberry Manors in the year

of 1986.” None of the plaintiffs signed the filed document; only Houze signed, as “attorney in

fact, agent of plaintiffs.” Houze, however, is not an attorney.1

Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that “every pleading,

written motion, and other paper shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s

individual name, or if the party is not represented by an attorney, shall be signed by the party.” 

Case 2:05-cv-00130-DFL-GGH Document 3 Filed 05/31/05 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Plaintiffs, if they wish to represent themselves, must individually sign every

pleading, written motion, and other paper filed in this court. Otherwise, they can seek legal

representation from a practicing attorney who may sign such papers for them. Houze is not such

an attorney. 

Furthermore, the application to proceed without prepayment of fees must be

completed by the plaintiffs individually. Unless Houze is also a plaintiff, his application to

proceed without prepayment of fees is irrelevant. 

Even had plaintiffs completed this court’s form application to proceed in forma

pauperis, and demonstrated a proper basis to proceed without prepayment of funds, this court

would not permit the action to proceed upon the lodged complaint. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 sets forth general rules of pleading in the Federal Courts. 

Complaints are required to set a forth (1) the grounds upon which the court’s jurisdiction rests,

(2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing entitlement to relief; and (3) a demand for

the relief plaintiff seeks. Rule 8 requires “sufficient allegations to put defendants fairly on notice

of the claims against them.” McKeever v. Block, 932 F.2d 795, 798 (9th Cir. 1991); accord,

McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 1996) (stating that a complaint should set forth

“who is being sued, for what relief, and on what theory, with enough detail to guide discovery”). 

The complaint does not meet these requirements. There is no allegation of the basis for this

court’s jurisdiction, other than a statement that the claim “is authorized by Article III Section 2 of

the United States Constitution.” Further, the complaint’s allegations are not sufficient to put

defendants fairly on notice. It includes only a brief reference to flooding of plaintiffs’ property in

1986, and makes vague references to allegedly related state court proceedings. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiffs shall submit, individually, within twenty days from the date of this

order, either completed applications and affidavits in support of their respective requests to

proceed in forma pauperis on the forms provided by the Clerk of Court, or the appropriate filing

Case 2:05-cv-00130-DFL-GGH Document 3 Filed 05/31/05 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

fee; plaintiffs’ failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action

be dismissed; and,

2. Plaintiffs shall submit, within twenty days from the date of this order, an

amended complaint, signed by each individual plaintiff, or by an attorney authorized to practice

law in this district who represents them. 

DATED: 5/31/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

____________________________________

 GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:mb

Castro0130.ord

Case 2:05-cv-00130-DFL-GGH Document 3 Filed 05/31/05 Page 3 of 3