28 U.S.C. § 1654

Appearance personally or by counsel

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar

In all courts of the United States the parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel as, by the rules of such courts, respectively, are permitted to manage and conduct causes therein.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3,069 cases (1,983 in the last 5 years), 1949–2026 · leading case: Winkelman Ex Rel. Winkelman v. Parma City School District
Winkelman Ex Rel. Winkelman v. Parma City School District (2007) scotus · cites it 8× “See also 28 U.S.C. § 1654 (allowing parties to prosecute their own claims pro se ).”
Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc. (2008) ca9 · cites it 7× “§ 1654 provides that in federal court, “parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel as, by the rules of such courts, respectively, are permitted to manage and conduct causes therein.” Significant is the language contained in the statute that limits the…”
Faretta v. California (1975) scotus · cites it 8× “" The right is currently codified in 28 U. S. C. § 1654 . With few exceptions, each of the several States also accords a defendant the right to represent himself in any criminal case.”
United States Ex Rel. Mergent Services v. Flaherty (2008) ca2 · cites it 6× “Specifically, 28 U.S.C. § 1654 provides that in federal court, “parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel as, by the rules of such courts, respectively, are permitted to manage and conduct causes therein.”
Raskin v. Dallas Indep Sch Dist (2023) ca5 · cites it 9× “In reaching the latter conclusion, the district court relied on our unpublished authority that 28 U.S.C. § 1654 , which guarantees parties the right to proceed pro se in federal court, does not authorize pro se parents to litigate their children’s claims.”
Eagle Associates v. Bank of Montreal (1991) ca2 · cites it 7× “Schuster relied on 28 U.S.C. § 1654 (1988) and N.Y. Civ. Prac.”
Stoner v. Santa Clara County Office of Education (2007) ca9 · cites it 5× “It has long been established that an individual wanting to prosecute or defend an action in federal court must be represented by a lawyer admitted to practice before that court, unless such individual- is permitted to proceed pro se under 28 U.S.C. § 1654 or other federal law,…”
United States Ex Rel. Rockefeller v. Westinghouse Electric Co. (2003) dcd · cites it 6× “§ 3730 (d)(1), and if the United States does not intervene and the relator is successful, the relator receives twenty-five to thirty percent of the judgment, 31 U.”
Murray Ex Rel. Purnell v. City of Phila. (2018) ca3 · cites it 3× “Under 28 U.S.C. § 1654 , "the parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel" in the federal courts.”
Pappas v. Philip Morris, Inc. (2019) ca2 · cites it 4× “at 21-22, the portion of the Guest opinion discussing whether the estate could be represented by a pro se litigant relied exclusively on 28 U.S.C. § 1654 and federal cases governing the practice of law in federal courts, referencing New York law only to identify the nature of…”
Grant Sunny Iriele v. Richard Carroll Griffin (2023) ca11 · cites it 6× “The government countered that, while 28 U.S.C. § 1654 4 allows individuals to represent themselves in federal court, a non- binding, unpublished decision from our Court, Alabama state law, and the district court’s local rules did not allow a non-attorney to represent an estate…”
Timson v. Sampson (2008) ca11 · cites it 2× “” 28 U.S.C. § 1654 (emphasis added). The provision appears to provide a personal right that does not extend to the representation of the interests of others.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.