Opinion
No. 4:07-CV-1726 CAS.
October 31, 2011
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on petitioner Lloyd Grass's pro se motion for summary judgment. As an initial matter, the Court notes that petitioner is represented by counsel, and therefore should generally communicate with the Court through his counsel. "There is no constitutional or statutory right to simultaneously proceed pro se and with benefit of counsel." United States v. Agofsky, 20 F.3d 866, 872 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 909 (1994). "A district court has no obligation to entertain pro se motions filed by a represented party." Abdullah v. United States, 240 F.3d 683, 686 (8th Cir. 2001); Agofsky, 20 F.3d at 872 (holding that a court commits "no error" in refusing to rule onpro se motions raised by a represented party). For this reason, the undersigned will deny petitioner's pro se motion for summary judgment without prejudice. The Court will only consider documents filed on petitioner's behalf by his counsel, and petitioner shall only communicate with the Court through his counsel.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner Lloyd Grass's pro se motion for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice. [Doc. 48]
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner Lloyd Grass shall only communicate with the Court through his counsel. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's counsel, attorney Susan K. Eckles, shall send a copy of this Order to petitioner.