In the case of Guillard v. Pyle, S.D.Oh. No. 2:22-cv-1960 (May 2, 2023), federal district court held that (1) a pro se litigant cannot assert claims on behalf of the litigant’s minor children and (2) the claims in a complaint must be backed by factual allegations, not just conclusions.
In this case, the parent argued that the school district violated multiple federal laws, including the Fourteenth Amendment by treating the parent’s complaints of the child’s mistreatment with indifference and hostility. In response, the school district argued that (1) many of the claims in the complaint dealt with the rights of the parent’s minor child, which is impermissible for a pro se litigant and (2) the complaint did not allege enough facts to show that the parent was deprived of a constitutionally protected right. The federal district court agreed with the school district.
In support of its decision in favor of the school district, the federal district court explained that a pro se litigant may only bring claims on behalf of the litigant, not the litigant’s minor child. The federal district court further explained that the parent failed to provide any specific factual allegations to support the claims.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.