Welch v. Terhune
This text of 11 F. App'x 747 (Welch v. Terhune) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM2
William W. Welch, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s order denying leave to file the action without prepayment of the full filing fee. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and review denial of leave to proceed in forma pauperis for abuse of discretion. Minetti v. Port of Seattle, 152 F.3d 1113, 1115 (9th Cir.1998) (per curiam). We affirm.
The district court properly determined that Welch, proceeding pro se, could not prosecute the instant action as a class action. See C.E. Pope Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir.1987) (holding that a pro se litigant may not appear as an attorney for others). We express no opinion as to whether Welch’s claims would be cognizable if brought as an individual action.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 F. App'x 747, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welch-v-terhune-ca9-2001.