As explained below, the petition's errors relating to the caption, naming of parties, and signatures are not fatal defects that render the petition a nullity which cannot be amended. SeeLuck v. Rohel , 171 Idaho 51, ––––, 518 P.3d 350, 356 (2022) (reiterating that this Court has expressly rejected the common law rule of nullity).
Other courts have reached similar conclusions. See Luck v. Rohel, 518 P.3d 350, 355 (Idaho 2022) (holding that non-attorney guardian could not act in a pro se capacity for ward under Idaho's version of Civil Rule 17); Brown v. Wright, 2006-Ohio-38, ¶¶ 13-14, 2006 WL 38267 (Ct. App.) (concluding that plaintiff's non-attorney conservator could not prosecute his claims pro se). For similar reasons, most courts have concluded that a parent cannot represent a child pro se.
"A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim should not be granted ‘unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief.’ " Luck v. Rohel , 171 Idaho 51, 518 P.3d 350, 354 (2022) (quoting Paslay v. A&B Irrigation Dist. , 162 Idaho 866, 869, 406 P.3d 878, 881 (2017) ). "Under Rule 12(b)(6), ‘[a]fter viewing all facts and inferences from the record in favor of the non-moving party, the Court will ask whether a claim for relief has been stated.’