Jamerson Bey v. Giardino
4:25-cv-00161
N.D. Tex.Apr 23, 2025Background
- Malik-Abdul Jamerson Bey, proceeding pro se, filed this lawsuit on February 20, 2025.
- Bey sought to bring claims on behalf of the “Malik Abdul Jamerson Bey Trust” as its trustee.
- Bey’s complaint was signed by “Danny Vega, A.R.”, who is not an attorney and did not provide a bar number.
- The court repeatedly ordered Bey to either retain counsel for the trust or file an amended complaint asserting only his own claims and signed by himself.
- Bey failed to comply with these orders and did not provide further justification or explanation for noncompliance.
- The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a pro se litigant can prosecute a case on behalf of a trust | Bey attempted to do so as trustee. | Not specifically stated; court noted Vega was not an attorney. | Only licensed counsel may represent a trust; Bey must proceed with own claims or retain counsel. |
| Whether noncompliance with court orders warrants dismissal under Rule 41(b) | No explicit argument; Bey failed to respond. | Not provided. | Repeated noncompliance justifies dismissal without prejudice. |
| Whether dismissal should be with or without prejudice | Not addressed. | Not addressed. | Dismissal is without prejudice since conduct was not clearly willful. |
| Effect of proceeding pro se on compliance with court rules | Bey appeared to rely on pro se status. | Not addressed. | Pro se status does not exempt from procedural requirements. |
Key Cases Cited
- Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626 (1962) (courts have inherent authority to dismiss cases for failure to prosecute)
- Hulsey v. Texas, 929 F.2d 168 (5th Cir. 1991) (self-representation does not excuse failure to comply with rules)
- Boudwin v. Graystone Ins. Co., Ltd., 756 F.2d 399 (5th Cir. 1985) (dismissal authority flows from court's power to manage its docket)
- Long v. Simmons, 77 F.3d 878 (5th Cir. 1996) (dismissals with prejudice are extreme sanctions for want of prosecution)