Opinion
3:24-cv-1535-WQH-MSB
09-19-2024
DALE SUNDBY, Trustee, Plaintiff, v. SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHERIFF, OFFICER B. PALMER, in her official sheriff capacity, OFFICER R. BERNARDINO, in his official sheriff capacity, OFFICER C. MCCOY, in his official sheriff capacity, and DOES 1 through X, Defendants.
ORDER
Hon. William Q. Hayes United States District Court
The matters before the Court are: (1) Plaintiff Dale Sundby's Motion for Leave to Electronically File Documents (ECF No. 3) and (2) the Court's Order to Show Cause regarding Plaintiff's purported pro se representation of a trust in this action.
I. BACKGROUND
On August 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed the Complaint (ECF No. 1, Compl.), asserting claims against Defendants for violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, as well as various violations of the California Constitution and California Civil Code § 52.1. In particular, the Complaint alleges claims arising from Defendants' alleged execution of “a writ of possession at a property” that “was held in a family trust” (the “Trust”). (Compl. at 3); id. ¶ 9. The Complaint identifies the plaintiff as “Dale Sundby, Trustee” and alleges that “Plaintiff is trustee of the Trust.” Id. ¶¶ 1, 10. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action.
II. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO ELECTRONICALLY FILE DOCUMENTS
On August 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed the pending Motion for Leave to Electronically File Documents. Pursuant to the ECF Manual, pro se litigants are required to submit and file all documents in paper form unless the court grants the litigant leave to electronically file. See ECF Manual § 2(b). “A pro se party seeking leave to electronically file documents must file a motion and demonstrate the means to do so properly by stating their equipment and software capabilities in addition to agreeing to follow all rules and policies in the CM/ECF Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual.” Id.
In his motion, Plaintiff states his equipment and software capabilities and agrees that he “[is] able to comply with the equipment and rule requirements governing electronic filing.” (ECF No. 3 at 1.) The Court finds Plaintiff has satisfied the requirements for obtaining leave to electronically file documents.
Plaintiff's motion for leave to electronically file documents is granted. Plaintiff is required to follow all rules and policies in the ECF Manual, available via the Court's website. As stated in the ECF Manual, Plaintiff “must register as a user with the Clerk's Office and as a subscriber to PACER within five (5) days” if he has not already done so. ECF Manual § 2(b).
III. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
To the extent the Complaint asserts claims on behalf of the Trust, Plaintiff cannot proceed pro se in this action. See Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc., 546 F.3d 661, 667 (9th Cir. 2008) (“[A]bsent statutory authority stating otherwise, the general rule against permitting pro se litigants from representing others is applicable[.]”); C.E. Pope Equity Tr. v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 698 (9th Cir. 1987) (explaining that a trustee “may not claim that his status as trustee includes the right to present arguments pro se in federal court”). The Court takes judicial notice that, in a separate action where Plaintiff similarly purported to represent a trust, Plaintiff's case was dismissed after he failed to comply with the court's “repeated[]” orders to retain legal counsel on behalf of the trust. Sundby v. Marquee Funding Grp., Inc., No. 19-cv-0390-GPC-AHG, 2023 WL 4686445, at *1 (S.D. Cal. July 21, 2023); see also Sundby v. Marquee Funding Grp., Inc., No. 21-55504, 2022 WL 4826445, at *1 (9th Cir. Oct. 3, 2022) (“A trustee may not represent a trust pro se in federal court.” (citing C.E. Pope Equity Tr., 818 F.2d at 697)).
Accordingly, no later than thirty (30) days from the entry of this Order, Plaintiff shall:
(1) retain an attorney and instruct the attorney to enter a notice of appearance in this action;
(2) file an amended complaint that clearly alleges claims solely on Plaintiff's own behalf as an individual; or
(3) otherwise show cause why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to the rule articulated in Simon, 546 F.3d at 667.
The Court will stay the proceedings pending Plaintiff's response to this Order.
IV. CONCLUSION
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Grant Leave to Electronically File Documents (ECF No. 3) is granted. Plaintiff shall respond to the Court's Order to Show Cause no later than thirty (30) days from the entry of this Order. If Plaintiff fails to adequately respond to the Order to Show Cause within thirty (30) days, the Court shall dismiss the Complaint without prejudice and close the case. This case is stayed pending Plaintiff's response to this Order.