DEANTHONY A. JACKSON, ET AL.
v.
STEPHEN WHYTE, ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Four pretrial detainees filed a pro se civil rights complaint jointly under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking to share filing fees while proceeding in forma pauperis and as a class action. The district court dismissed the complaint, holding that the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires each prisoner to pay the full filing fee individually and that pro se prisoners cannot represent fellow inmates in joint actions.
The court held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires each prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis to pay the full filing fee individually, and that it is plain error to permit pro se prisoners to proceed jointly or represent fellow inmates in class actions. Each plaintiff must file a separate complaint in a new case on his own behalf.
[1] A pro se prisoner litigant cannot bring a civil rights action on behalf of other prisoners.
[2] A pro se prisoner litigant cannot represent fellow inmates in a class action suit.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the plain language of the PLRA requires that each prisoner proceeding IFP pay the full filing fee”
Establishes the statutory requirement that each prisoner must independently pay the full filing fee when proceeding in forma pauperis, prohibiting cost-sharing among multiple plaintiffs.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFour pretrial detainees in Manatee County Jail jointly filed a civil rights complaint against two assistant public defenders, a private attorney, and …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Civil Rights Complaint (Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983) cases and more on FLexlaw
Jackson and three other pretrial detainees in the Manatee County Jail initiated this action by jointly filing a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiffs also move for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, (Doc. 2), and for class action status, (Doc. 3). The four Plaintiffs name as Defendants two assistant public defenders, a private attorney, and the judges of the 12th Judicial Circuit Court. They assert unrelated complaints about their state criminal prosecutions.
The Complaint must be dismissed. Plaintiffs may not join together in a single civil rights suit to share the filing fee. In considering whether the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) allows multi-plaintiff, in forma pauperis, civil actions, the Eleventh Circuit has concluded that “the plain language of the PLRA requires that each prisoner proceeding IFP pay the full filing fee[.]" Hubbard v. Haley, 262 F. 3d 1194, 1198 (11th Cir. 2001).
1
Further, it would be error to allow Plaintiffs, who are pro se pretrial detainees, to proceed jointly. See Wallace v. Smith, 145 F. App'x 300, 302 (11th Cir. 2005) (“[I]t is plain error to permit [an] imprisoned litigant who is unassisted by counsel to represent his fellow inmates in a class action.” (quoting Oxendine v. Williams, 509 F. 2d 1405, 1407 (4th Cir. 1975)); see also Johnson v. Brown, 581 F. App’x 777, 781 (11th Cir. 2014) (stating that a pro se prisoner litigant cannot bring an action on behalf of other prisoners); Bass v. Benton, 408 F. App'x 298, 299 (11th Cir. 2011) (stating plaintiff, a pro se prisoner, could not seek relief on behalf of fellow inmates nor represent them in a class action suit).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Complaint, (Doc. 1), is DISMISSED without prejudice to each Plaintiff filing a new complaint in a new case under a new case number, solely on his own behalf. The motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, (Doc. 2), and for class action status, (Doc. 3), are DENIED as moot. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on January 14, 2026.
Kathryn Kimball Mizelle United States District Judge
2