Opinion
CRIMINAL DOCKET No. 08-176, SECTION I/2.
November 23, 2009
ORDER
Considering the foregoing motion to quash filed by Ruth Petal, IT IS ORDERED that the motion is DENIED for failure to comply with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion was filed by Ruth Petal on behalf of Malcolm Petal. The sole signatory to the filing is Ms. Petal purporting to act on behalf of Malcolm Petal pursuant to a power of attorney. The Court notes that Ms. Petal is not a member of the bar of this Court nor does she purport to be a licensed attorney in any jurisdiction.
R. Doc. No. 125.
Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that "[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's name — or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented." Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(a). "[I]n federal court a party can represent himself or be represented by a lawyer, but cannot be represented by a nonlawyer." Gonzales v. Wyatt, 157 F.3d 1016, 1021 (5th Cir. 1998) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1654 ("In all courts of the United States the parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel") (emphasis added)). If the Court allowed the Petals to circumvent these requirements through a power of attorney agreement, it would undermine the mandate of Local Rule 83.2.5 that requires "any party who does not appear in proper person [to] be represented by a member of the bar."
Accordingly, Ms. Petal's motion is DENIED with the Court rendering no opinion on the merits of the motion.