to sign the habeas petition on behalf of his client, explaining the general practice and its rationale: Notwithstanding the language of [the statute], it has been the frequent practice in this district to present habeas corpus petitions in deportation cases signed and verified by others than the person detained. In such cases, often for lack of time, as well as because of infancy or incompetency, it would be impossible to present a petition signed and verified by the person detained.... Id. In a similar vein, the District Court for the Northern District of Ohio recognized the general practice allowing next friend standing, and permitted a brother-in-law to bring a petition on behalf of a minor under 21: This application is made on [the prisoner’s] beha t. 1761, 100 L.Ed.2d 187 (1988) (<HOLDING>); Demosthenes v. Baal, 495 U.S. 731, 735, 110
recognizing nextfriend standing of mother on behalf of prisoner holding that claim belongs to child but allowing mother to assert it on childs behalf recognizing that prisoners former attorney had a significant relationship with the prisoner for purposes of next friend standing because attorney had acted on behalf of the prisoner in prior legal proceedings recognizing distinction between corporate officer acting on behalf of himself and corporate officer acting on behalf of his corporation holding that the minor was otherwise represented because the childs legal guardian his mother brought the action on his behalf