Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Crump-Donahue v. United States Dep't of Agriculture

June 11, 2007

JUANITA M. CRUMP-DONAHUE PLAINTIFF
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEFENDANT



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. United States District Judge

ORDER

Pending is Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. No. 2). Defendant has responded (Doc. No. 5) and Plaintiff has replied (Doc. No. 6).

BACKGROUND

Most of Plaintiff's Complaint rehashes issues that were the subject of her previous law suits against the United States Department of Agriculture. However, Plaintiff now contends that Defendant "destroyed [her printer in] February 2007" and "disabled her computers and destroyed years of saved documentation."*fn1 Plaintiff also contends that Defendant has "disabled several Internet Services and manipulated her web sites to prevent her access."*fn2 As a result of Defendant's alleged activities, Plaintiff asserts that she's suffered numerous "unpleasant emotional and physical reactions."*fn3

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

A temporary restraining order may be granted only if the moving party can demonstrate:

(1) a likelihood of success on the merits; (2) the movant will suffer irreparable harm absent the restraining order; (3) the balance of harms favors the movant; and (4) the public interest favors the movant.*fn4 Injunctive relieve is an extraordinary remedy, and is permissible only when there are inadequate legal remedies.*fn5

Plaintiff alleges that "because of the threat of immediate danger to Plaintiff's physical, mental, and emotion health and life" resulting from Defendant's alleged interference with her computer, a temporary restraining order should be issued. Because Plaintiff has not and can not establish that she will suffer irreparable harm from the temporary loss of use of her computer, the Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED.

PLAINTIFFS LISTED IN COMPLAINT

Plaintiff asserts that, in addition to her own claims, she is bringing claims on behalf of her aunts and mother.*fn6 Since Ms. Crump-Donahue is not a licensed attorney, her attempt to bring claims on behalf of her aunts and mother constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.

Individuals who are not licensed attorneys can appear in the courts and engage in the practice of law provided that they do so for themselves and in connection with their own business.*fn7 However, it is well-settled that only a licensed attorney may represent another party in court.*fn8 Arkansas law strongly disfavors non-lawyers representing the interests of other:

In light of our duty to ensure that parties are represented by people knowledgeable and trained in the law, we cannot say that the unauthorized practice of law simply results in an amendable defect. Where a party not licensed to practice law in this state attempts to represent the interests of others by submitting himself or herself to jurisdiction of a court, those actions such as the filing of pleadings, are rendered a nullity.*fn9 When a non-lawyer attempts to represent the interests of other persons, the practice constitutes the unauthorized practice of law and results in a nullity.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs Ms. Eldora Spencer, Ms. Ophelia Richardson, the Georgia Lee Holloway Estate, and Ms. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.