Kyrima Anderson, et al. v. Warden Jessie Williams, et al.

• Court: District Court, M.D. Georgia
• Decided: November 21, 2025
• Docket: 5:25-cv-00506
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

KYRIMA ANDERSON, et al. : : Plaintiffs, : : VS. : NO. 5:25-cv-00506-MTT-ALS : Warden JESSIE WILLIAMS, et al., : : Defendants. : ________________________________ :

ORDER OF DISMISSAL Pro se Plaintiff Kyrima Anderson, a prisoner at Pulaski State Prison in Hawkinsville, Georgia, has filed a “class-action complaint” on behalf of herself and other prisoners held at Pulaski State Prison as well as at Emmanuel Women’s Facility. ECF No. 1. However, a prerequisite for class action certification is a finding by the Court that the representative party can “fairly and adequately protect the interest of the class.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). Circuit Courts have repeatedly held a pro se plaintiff is not an adequate class representative and may not litigate on behalf of others. See e.g. FuQua v. Massey, 615 F. App'x 611, 612 (11th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (“The right to appear pro se … is limited to parties conducting their own cases, and does not extend to non-attorney parties representing the interests of others.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 873 (11th Cir. 2008) (holding that the personal right to proceed pro se established under 28 U.S.C. § 1654 “does not extend to the representation of the interests of others.”); Johnson v. Brown, 581 F. App'x 777, 781 (11th Cir. 2014) (finding pro se litigant cannot bring an action on behalf of fellow inmates); Bass v. Benton, 408 F. App'x 298 (11th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of pro se former prisoner's §

1983 class action because “the general provision permitting parties to proceed pro se” does not provide “a personal right that ... extend[s] to the representation of the interests of others”); Wallace v. Smith, 145 F. App’x 300, 302 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (citing Oxendine v. Williams, 509 F.2d 1405, 1407 (4th Cir. 1975) (finding it “plain error to permit [an] imprisoned litigant who is unassisted by counsel to represent his fellow inmates in a class action”). Here, Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se, and thus, the Court cannot

find she is an adequate representative that can litigate on behalf of her fellow prisoners in a federal lawsuit. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this Complaint without prejudice. Each Plaintiff may file their own separate complaint asserting claims that are personal to that prisoner and for which they will be individually responsible for filing fees.

SO ORDERED, this 21st day of November, 2025. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT