UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Albert Kuperman

v. Civil No. 05-cv-185-PB

Stephen Curry, Commissioner,

New Hampshire Department of

Corrections, et al.

O R D E R

Plaintiff Albert Kuperman is an inmate at the Northern New

Hampshire Correctional Facility of the New Hampshire Department

of Corrections (“DOC”) who has filed a civil rights complaint

(document no. 1). He asserts a number of federal constitutional

and statutory claims alleging, among other things, that his right

to freely exercise his religion and his right to be protected

from harm have been violated by DOC employees who have improperly

deprived him of an acceptable religious diet and safe housing, at

least in part to retaliate against Kuperman for his participation

in lawsuits against the DOC. Kuperman has filed a motion to

amend his complaint seeking to prosecute this matter as a class

action and to add an additional named inmate, James A. White, as

well as other unnamed inmates to the action as plaintiffs who

Case 1:05-cv-00185-PB Document 9 Filed 06/14/05 Page 1 of 4
2

have had their rights violated (document no. 8). For the reasons

stated herein, that motion is denied.

It is well-settled that parties to a lawsuit cannot be

represented by anyone other than themselves or a member of the

bar. See 28 U.S.C. § 1654; see also Local Rules of the United

States District Court for the District of New Hampshire (“LR”)

83.2(d) (“Persons who are not members of the bar . . . will be

allowed to appear before this court only on their own behalf”) 

and LR 83.6(b) (“Pro se parties must appear personally . . . . A

pro se party may not authorize another person who is not a member

of the bar of this court to appear on his or her behalf.”); see

also Herrera-Venegas v. Sanchez-Rivera, 681 F.2d 41, 42 (1st Cir.

1982) (restricting a “jail house lawyer” to assisting, not

representing, other inmates). Pro se litigants cannot “fairly

and adequately protect the interests of the class,” as required

by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). See Avery v. Powell, 695 F. Supp.

632, 643 (D.N.H. 1988) (denying pro se plaintiff’s motion for

class certification because of his incompetence to represent the

class); see also Young v. Wall, 2005 WL 1366742 *1 (D.R.I. May

24, 2005) (discussing requirements for certifying a plaintiff

class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) in the context of a pro se

Case 1:05-cv-00185-PB Document 9 Filed 06/14/05 Page 2 of 4
1Should White wish to join this action, he must file and

sign his own complaint, accompanied by his own filing fee or in

forma pauperis application. If both actions are deemed

sufficient to proceed past preliminary review, Kuperman and White

could then seek to consolidate their claims if they so desired.

2Kuperman has requested that I appoint counsel in this

matter. I will rule on this request at the time preliminary

review of the complaint is made.

3

complaint and finding such a complaint to be inadequate). 

Accordingly, neither an individual inmate such as White nor a

class of inmates can be added to Kuperman’s action at this time.1

In addition to the general inability of a pro se plaintiff

to represent a class, Kuperman himself has stated concerns about

his ability to properly prosecute the action without the

assistance of legal counsel.2 Therefore, it is particularly

inappropriate to allow Kuperman to represent the interests of an

entire class of persons. 

Although I am denying the motion for class certification, it

is without comment on the merits of the suit, and the action 

will continue to preliminary review, pursuant to LR 4.3(d)(2). 

At the time of preliminary review, this Court will rule on the

other motions pending.

Accordingly, plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend (document no. 8) is

denied. This denial is without prejudice to renewal of this

Case 1:05-cv-00185-PB Document 9 Filed 06/14/05 Page 3 of 4
4

motion should the plaintiff obtain representation by a member of

the bar of this court at a later date.

SO ORDERED.

________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: June 14, 2005

cc: Albert Kuperman, pro se

Case 1:05-cv-00185-PB Document 9 Filed 06/14/05 Page 4 of 4