From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peterson v. Morin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
Oct 6, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. C-11-176 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 6, 2011)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. C-11-176

10-06-2011

TERRY JUNIOR PETERSON, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT A. MORIN, et al, Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE

TO SUPPLEMENT COMPLAINT

Pending is plaintiff's motion for leave to supplement his complaint (D.E. 20).

Leave to amend should be freely granted when justice requires, FED. R. CIV. P. 15(a) (2), unless the amendment would be futile. Newby v. Enron Corp., 542 F.3d 463, 469 (5th Cir. 2008). In his supplement to the complaint, plaintiff is attempting to add additional plaintiffs. Plaintiff is not a lawyer, and the rules forbid him from representing other persons. The motion is denied as futile. Each of the inmates is free to exhaust his administrative remedies and file a lawsuit on his own behalf.

B. JANICE ELLINGTON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Peterson v. Morin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
Oct 6, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. C-11-176 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 6, 2011)
Case details for

Peterson v. Morin

Case Details

Full title:TERRY JUNIOR PETERSON, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT A. MORIN, et al, Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

Date published: Oct 6, 2011

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. C-11-176 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 6, 2011)