On April 7, 2016, in Rodgers v. Lancaster Police & Fire Department, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held, in a matter of first impression, that an individual with capacity to represent an estate under state law may represent an estate pro se if that person was the estate's sole beneficiary and there were no other creditors ( (5th Cir. April 7, 2016)).

Chaz Rodgers's son, Anthony Hudson, died from a gunshot wound from a drive-by shooting. Rodgers, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed suit against several parties, including the Lancaster police and fire departments, law-enforcement officers, the hospital, and its medical personnel, for failing to respond to the scene and treating her son inappropriately. During the initial judicial screening required for in forma pauperis proceedings, the district court sua sponte dismissed the case without prejudice, holding that Rodgers could not sue pro se on behalf of the estate and represent the interests of others as a non-lawyer. The district court also dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the wrongful-death claims arose under state law and there was no diversity.

On appeal, the Fifth Circuit reversed. The court first found that federal civil rights laws extend federal-question jurisdiction by incorporating state wrongful-death statutes under 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Rodgers could therefore bring a claim under federal civil-rights laws through Texas's wrongful-death statute under which she had capacity to sue as the surviving parent. Construing Rodgers's pleadings liberally, the Fifth Circuit determined that she adequately alleged that she suffered personal injuries from violations of her son's rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985. As a result, the court had subject matter jurisdiction.

The Fifth Circuit also ruled that the district court erred in dismissing Rodgers's action solely because she was proceeding pro se on behalf of the estate. Joining the US Courts of Appeals for the Second and Sixth Circuits, the Fifth Circuit held that a litigant with capacity under state law to represent an estate may do so pro se in a survival action if the litigant was the estate's sole beneficiary and the estate had no creditors (see Guest v. Hansen, 603 F.3d 15, 19-21 (2d Cir. 2010); Bass v. Leatherwood, 788 F.3d 228, 230-31 (6th Cir. 2015)). The court remanded the case for further determination whether Rodgers was the estate's sole beneficiary.