BREWER
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

M.D. Fla. | 2021-07-20
District Court, M.D. Florida (2021)

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.

Holding

The court held that the complaint failed to allege subject-matter jurisdiction and proper service, warranting dismissal.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging discrimination and withholding of compensation. The court reviewed the case sua sponte and found deficiencies in…

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.

Topics
Sua Sponte Review Pro Se Representation Service Of Process Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sua Sponte Review cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

David Brewer cannot represent both Plaintiffs pro se. While free to represent himself pro se, Brewer cannot represent the other Plaintiff, Tonkin Gulf (Yankee Station) Naval Personnel, unless he is a lawyer. Local Rule 2.02(b)(2) (“A party, other than a natural person, can appear through the lawyer only.”).

on or before August 3, 2021. The failure to do so will result in the case being closed without further notice. 3. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 7) is DENIED as moot. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on July 20, 2021.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies: All Parties of Record

Footnotes
2 See https://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/sites/flmd/files/documents/flmd-guide-for-proceedingwithout-a-lawyer.pdf. Finally, Plaintiffs should review the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as they relate to service. Plaintiffs attempted to execute service by personally serving a VA law librarian. (Doc. 6). The Federal Rules provide specific requirements on how to serve a United States entity, and the attempted service here falls short. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(). Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. 2. Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint consistent with this Order

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw