Caraffa v. United States of America

Opinion

WO MDR Alfred E. Caraffa, No. CV 20-00774-PHX-MTL (ESW) Plaintiff, v. ORDER United States, et al., Defendants.

On April 20, 2020, Plaintiff Alfred E. Caraffa, who is confined in a Maricopa County Jail, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In an April 23, 2020 Order, the Court denied the deficient Motion to Proceed and gave Plaintiff thirty days to either pay the administrative and filing fees or file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. On April 30, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Combine Cases, Exhibits to Support Civil Action, a First Amended Complaint, and a second Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. On May 7, 2020, Plaintiff filed a “Motion to Change Assignment of Judge(s).” On May 8, 2020, he filed a Motion for Default Judgment, a Motion to Support the Motion for Default Judgment, and a Motion to Combine. In a May 11, 2020 Order, the Court denied the Motion to Change Assignment of Judges, granted the second Application to Proceed, denied the April 30 Motion to Combine Cases, dismissed the First Amended Complaint because Plaintiff had failed to state a claim, and gave Plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint that cures the deficiencies identified in the Order. In a May 14, 2020 Order, the Court denied the three Motions Plaintiff filed on May 8. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's June 8, 2020 “Motion to: New Joining Parties of Current Civil Action/Motion to Combine” (Doc. 18). Plaintiff seeks to add “an unknown number of Plaintiff]]s” to this case and to combine this case with CV 20-00800-PHX- 6) MTL (ESW) and CV 20-01020-PHX-MTL (ESW). The Court will deny Plaintiff's request to combine this case with CV 20-00800 and CV 20-01020; both cases were dismissed on May 27, 2020. The Court will deny □□□□□□□□□□□ request to add other plaintiffs because Plaintiff cannot sue on behalf of others. A party is permitted to plead and conduct his or her case “personally or by counsel.” 28 U.S.C. § 1654. A non-lawyer may appear on his own behalf in his own case but “has no authority to appear as an attorney for others than himself.” Johns v. County of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting C.E. Pope Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1987)). A “‘plaintiff generally must assert his own legal rights and interests, and cannot rest his claim to relief on the legal rights or interests of third parties.”” Mothershed v. Justices of the Supreme Court, 410 F.3d 602, 610 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting 17) Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499 (1975)); see also Johns, 114 F.3d at 876 (“constitutional claims are personal and cannot be asserted vicariously”). Thus, Plaintiff may only pursue his own claims, not those of others. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs “Motion to: New Joining Parties of Current Civil Action/Motion to Combine” (Doc. 18) is denied. Dated this 19th day of June, 2020. WMichadl T. dibunde Michael T. Liburdi United States District Judge