Taylor v. Pima, County of et al

Filing 711

ORDER DENYING 681 Motion to Intervene. Signed by Judge Rosemary Marquez on 8/3/23. (BAC)

Case 4:15-cv-00152-RM Document 711 Filed 08/04/23 Page 1 of 2

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Nina Alley,

No. CV-15-00152-TUC-RM
Plaintiff,

10
11

v.

12

County of Pima, et al.,

13

ORDER

Defendants.

14
15

Pending before the Court is Michael Edward Aguilar’s pro se Motion to Intervene.

16

(Doc. 681.) Mr. Aguilar asserts that he was illegally imprisoned even though he was

17

actually innocent, and he seeks to intervene in this matter “to convince the Court that at

18

no time are Defendants deserving of any benefit of doubt.” (Id. at 7-8.)

19

The Court must permit anyone to intervene who has an unconditional federal

20

statutory right to intervene or who “claims an interest relating to the property or

21

transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action

22

may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant’s ability to protect its interest,

23

unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a). The

24

Court also may permit anyone to intervene who has a conditional federal statutory right

25

to intervene or who “has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common

26

question of law or fact.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b).

27

Mr. Aguilar has not shown that intervention of right or permissive intervention is

28

appropriate under Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Accordingly, his

Case 4:15-cv-00152-RM Document 711 Filed 08/04/23 Page 2 of 2

1

Motion to Intervene will be denied.

2

IT IS ORDERED that the pro se Motion to Intervene (Doc. 681) is denied.

3

Dated this 3rd day of August, 2023.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-