Opinion
1:15-cv-1513-LJO-SMS
12-10-2015
SETH ARELLANO, a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem BERTHA HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF HANFORD and DOES 1-10, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S PETITION FOR ORDER APPOINTING GUARDIAN AD LITEM (Doc. 2) AND DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. 7)
Along with his complaint, Plaintiff Seth Arellano ("Plaintiff") filed a petition to appoint his grandmother, Bertha Hernandez, as his guardian ad litem for purposes of this case. Doc. 2. The Court finds that it is reasonable and necessary to appoint a guardian ad litem for Plaintiff. There also does not appear to be any conflict of interest or other reason disfavoring the requested appointment. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's petition and appoints Ms. Hernandez as Plaintiff's guardian ad litem for the purposes of this case.
Defendant City of Hanford ("the City") moves to dismiss Plaintiff's Monell claim. Doc. 7 at 7. The City also moves to dismiss Bertha Hernandez as a Plaintiff as she does not assert any causes of action. Id. at 8.
In his opposition, Plaintiff "concedes that [Bertha Hernandez] is only suing in her capacity as guardian ad litem and makes no individual claims in this matter." Doc. 8 at 7. In its half-page reply in support of its motion to dismiss, the City acknowledges Plaintiff's Monell claim "may satisfy pleading requirements." Doc. 9 at 3. After the City submitted its reply, Plaintiff filed a "Request for Telephonic Appearance" in which he confirms the City's apparent concession that he "has indeed pled sufficient facts to establish his [Monell] claim," and states his position that currently "there are no disputed issues before the court." Doc. 10 at 1. The City did not file anything in response to Plaintiff's request.
Accordingly, the Court:
1. APPOINTS Bertha Hernandez as Plaintiff's guardian ad litem for the purposes of this case;
2. DENIES the City's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Monell claim; and
3. GRANTS the City's motion to dismiss Ms. Hernandez as a party to this case.
Any further amended complaint shall be filed on or before January 8, 2016.
The Court notes that Plaintiff has consented to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, Doc. 4, but the City has not indicated whether it so consents. The Court ORDERS the City to file and serve papers to indicate whether it consents to the conduct of all further proceedings by a U.S. Magistrate Judge on or before December 18, 2015. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 10 , 2015
/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
See Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978).