Terra Libre Land Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank NA

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington
DecidedMay 4, 2022
Docket3:22-cv-05277
StatusUnknown

This text of Terra Libre Land Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank NA (Terra Libre Land Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank NA) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Terra Libre Land Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank NA, (W.D. Wash. 2022).

Opinion

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE

9 10 TERRA LIBRE LAND TRUST, on CASE NO. C22-5277JLR behalf of Keith Allan: Goulet, 11 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Petitioner, 12 v.

13 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al., 14 Respondents. 15 Before the court is Petitioner Terra Libre Land Trust’s (“TLLT”) petition for a 16 writ of mandamus against Respondents Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., National Asset 17 Management Group, JG Wentworth Home Lending LLC, Quality Loan Service 18 Corporation of Washington, Kitsap County Corporation, Orange Coast Title Company, 19 Solidifi Title Agency, Inc., Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, the Secretary of Veterans 20 Affairs, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Fidelity National Title 21 Insurance Company, and the law firm McCalla Raymer Liebert Pierce. (Pet. (Dkt. # 1).) 22 1 The petition is purportedly brought by TLLT “on behalf of Keith Allan: Goulet, an 2 American National, and not a ‘US Citizen’, and not a ‘Citizen of the United States’, by

3 and through Terra Libre Land Washington, and it’s [sic] ‘Managing Trustee’ Sterling Jay 4 Shaw,” pursuant to “‘a limited Durable Power of Attorney’ granted by Keith Allan: 5 Goulet, on this particular subject matter.” (Id. at 1.) The petition is signed only by Mr. 6 Shaw. (See id. at 30.) 7 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) requires “[e]very pleading” to be “signed by 8 at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s name—or by a party personally if the

9 party is unrepresented.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a). Although parties may generally “plead 10 and conduct their own cases,” 28 U.S.C. § 1654, “that privilege is personal to” the party, 11 C.E. Pope Equity Tr. v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697-98 (9th Cir. 1987). A 12 non-attorney, thus, “has no authority to appear as an attorney for others.” See id. 13 (collecting cases); Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc., 546 F.3d 661, 664-65 (9th Cir. 2008)

14 (noting that “courts have routinely adhered to the general rule prohibiting pro se plaintiffs 15 from pursuing claims on behalf of others in a representative capacity”). 16 Mr. Shaw, the lone signatory to the petition, is alleged to be a “Managing Trustee” 17 of TLLT or Terra Libre Land Washington, but not an attorney. (See Pet. at 1, 30.) 18 Moreover, he purports to represent the interests of TLLT, Terra Libre Land Washington,

19 or Mr. Goulet, not his own. (See id.) Accordingly, he may not represent other 20 individuals or entities or sign pleadings on their behalf. See C.E. Pope Equity Tr., 818 21 F.2d at 697-98. The fact that Mr. Goulet has apparently executed “‘a limited Durable 22 Power of Attorney’ . . . on this particular subject matter” (Pet. at 1) does not authorize 1 Mr. Shaw, who appears to be a non-attorney, to sign pleadings on behalf of other parties, 2 Johns v. Cnty. of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding that “a general

3 power of attorney” did not give non-attorney authority to represent another individual in 4 litigation); Greene v. Dantzler, No. 215CV02096GMNPAL, 2017 WL 663672, at *1-2 5 (D. Nev. Jan. 27, 2017) (precluding pro se party from representing his brother even 6 though brother had “signed a handwritten ‘legal authorization’ purportedly 7 giving . . . power of attorney to file” the case), report and recommendation adopted sub 8 nom. Greene, No. 215CV02096GMNPAL, 2017 WL 663241 (D. Nev. Feb. 15, 2017).

9 Unless Mr. Shaw is an attorney, he may represent his own interests, as those are personal 10 to him, but he may not represent TLLT, Terra Libre Land Washington, Mr. Goulet, or 11 any other entities or individuals. 12 Accordingly, TLLT is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE within fourteen (14) days 13 of the date of this order why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice for

14 failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a). 15 Dated this 4th day of May, 2022. 16 A 17 JAMES L. ROBART 18 United States District Judge 19 20 21 22

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Terra Libre Land Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank NA, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terra-libre-land-trust-v-wells-fargo-bank-na-wawd-2022.