Gallardo v. Trump

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted in forma pauperis status only to Plaintiff Garry David Gallardo and dismissed the action without prejudice. The court held that Gallardo could not represent other plaintiffs or maintain a pro se class action, and that the complaint's jurisdictional theory was frivolous. The court also denied the motion to appoint counsel and certify a class.

Holdings

1. Each plaintiff seeking to proceed in forma pauperis must submit an individualized application, including a sworn affidavit concerning that plaintiff's financial circumstances; prisoner-plaintiffs must also satisfy the Prison Litigation Reform Act's additional requirements. Because only Gallardo submitted the required materials, only Gallardo could proceed in forma pauperis.
2. A pro se litigant may represent only himself or herself and may not appear as counsel for other persons or maintain claims on their behalf.
3. A complaint asserting that Article III does not vest federal courts with jurisdiction to adjudicate criminal cases is frivolous when contrary to established authority and lacking an arguable basis in law or fact.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiffs seeking to proceed in forma pauperis must each submit an individualized, sworn application and, for prisoner-plaintiffs, the required certified six-month trust-account report.
2. Whether a pro se litigant may represent other persons or maintain a class action in federal court.
3. Whether Gallardo's assertion that Article III does not vest federal courts with jurisdiction over criminal cases was frivolous and required dismissal.

Disposition

dismissed