ANDERSON et al v. WILLIAMS et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
KYRIMA ANDERSON, et al. 	:
:
Plaintiffs, 	:
:
VS. 	: 	NO. 5:25-cv-00506-MTT-ALS
:
Warden JESSIE WILLIAMS, et al., 	:
:
Defendants. 	:
________________________________ 	:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Pro 	se 	Plaintiff 	Kyrima 	Anderson, 	a 	prisoner 	at 	Pulaski 	State 	Prison 	in
Hawkinsville, Georgia, has filed a “class-action complaint” on behalf of herself and other
prisoners held at Pulaski State Prison as well as at Emmanuel Women’s Facility. ECF No.
1. However, a prerequisite for class action certification is a finding by the Court that the
representative party can “fairly and adequately protect the interest of the class.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 23(a)(4). Circuit Courts have repeatedly held a pro se plaintiff is not an adequate
class representative and may not litigate on behalf of others. 	See e.g. FuQua v. Massey,
615 F. App'x 611, 612 (11th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (“The right to appear pro se … is
limited to parties conducting their own cases, and does not extend to non-attorney parties
representing the interests of others.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Timson v.
Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 873 (11th Cir. 2008) (holding that the personal right to proceed
pro se established under 28 U.S.C. § 1654 “does not extend to the representation of the
interests of others.”); Johnson v. Brown, 581 F. App'x 777, 781 (11th Cir. 2014) (finding
Case 5:25-cv-00506-MTT-ALS Document 3 Filed 11/21/25 Page 1 of 2

2
pro se litigant cannot bring an action on behalf of fellow inmates); Bass v. Benton, 408 F.
App'x 298 (11th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of pro se former prisoner's §
1983 class action because “the general provision permitting parties to proceed pro se” does
not provide “a personal right that ... extend[s] to the representation of the interests of
others”); Wallace v. Smith, 145 F. App’x 300, 302 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (citing
Oxendine v. Williams, 509 F.2d 1405, 1407 (4th Cir. 1975) (finding it “plain error to permit
[an] imprisoned litigant who is unassisted by counsel to represent his fellow inmates in a
class action”). Here, Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se, and thus, the Court cannot
find she is an adequate representative that can litigate on behalf of her fellow prisoners in
a federal lawsuit.
Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this Complaint without prejudice. 	Each
Plaintiff may file their own separate complaint asserting claims that are personal to that
prisoner and for which they will be individually responsible for filing fees.
SO ORDERED, this 21st day of November, 2025.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 5:25-cv-00506-MTT-ALS Document 3 Filed 11/21/25 Page 2 of 2