White v. Department of Corrections

Background

Robert White filed this action without a lawyer while held at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center. The complaint alleged that White and 27 other prisoners were forced to undergo mandatory, random, or orchestrated strip searches at that facility on August 29, 2025. Although the complaint listed all 28 prisoners as plaintiffs, only White signed it. White also was the only prisoner identified as having submitted a signed application to proceed without paying the filing fee and a prisoner authorization; the court had granted White that status.

Rules and analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 permits multiple plaintiffs to join one lawsuit when their claims arise from the same transaction or series of events and share a legal or factual question. Rule 21 permits a court to separate claims, even without finding that joinder was improper. The court considered judicial efficiency, possible prejudice, and whether the claims might involve different witnesses and evidence.

The court concluded that the practical problems of managing a lawsuit involving 28 unrepresented prisoners supported separation under Rule 21. Each plaintiff could appear only for himself and could not act as an attorney for the others. Each unrepresented plaintiff would also have to personally sign every filing. Because prisoners could be released or transferred, some might not be able to sign future documents. The court also cited security concerns that could limit communication, sharing of discovery, and access to one another’s filings, potentially causing piecemeal submissions, delays, and missed deadlines.

Order

The court severed all claims other than White’s claims from this action. White will remain the sole plaintiff in this case. The Clerk of Court was directed to open 27 separate civil actions, each with a new docket number, and to place a copy of the original complaint and this order in each new case. Those actions will proceed independently unless the court later orders otherwise. The court stated that severance did not prevent the cases from later being treated as related or consolidated if appropriate, but it made no determination on those issues.

The court also directed that the other 27 plaintiffs be required to submit signed complaint signature pages and either pay the required fees or submit signed applications to proceed without paying them and prisoner authorizations. It certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of such an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.