Owens v. Defazio et al

Filing 139

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/13/19 GRANTING 136 Motion to file under seal his motion for a competency hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad litem, and the attached medical records and DENYING plaintiff's motion for a competency hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad litem. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

THEON OWENS,

12
13
14

No. 2: 16-cv-2750 JAM KJN P
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

JOSEPH DEGAZIO, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant

18

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion for a competency hearing and

19

for appointment of a guardian ad litem. Also pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to seal

20

documents filed in support of the motion for a competency hearing and for appointment of a

21

guardian ad litem. (ECF No. 136.)

22

For the reasons stated herein, plaintiff’s motion to seal is granted. Plaintiff’s motion for a

23

competency hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad litem is denied.

24

Motion to Seal

25

Plaintiff has moved to seal his motion for a competency hearing and for appointment of a

26

guardian ad litem and the medical records attached to the motion. Plaintiff’s motion for a

27

competency hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad litem discusses the medical records

28

attached to the motion.
1

Two standards govern whether documents should be sealed: a “compelling reasons”

1
2

standard, which applies to dispositive motions, and a “good cause” standard, which applies to

3

non-dispositive discovery type motions. See Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d

4

1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006); see also Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 665, 677-78 (9th Cir.

5

2010). Courts determine whether good cause exists to protect the information from being

6

disclosed to the public by “balancing the needs for discovery against the need for confidentiality.”

7

Id. at 1180 (quoting Phillips ex re. Estates of Byrd v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1213

8

(9th Cir. 2002).)
Because plaintiff’s motion for a competency hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad

9
10

litem is a non-dispositive motion, the undersigned applies the good cause standard to consider

11

plaintiff’s motion to seal. After reviewing plaintiff’s motion for a competency hearing and for

12

appointment of a guardian ad litem, and the attached medical records, the undersigned finds good

13

cause to seal these documents. These documents are only relevant to plaintiff’s motion for a

14

competency hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad litem. Plaintiff has not sought to use

15

the information in these pleadings in support of the merits of the instant action. Accordingly,

16

plaintiff’s motion to seal these documents is granted.

17

Motion for Competency Hearing and For Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem

18

Legal Standard

19

Under Federal Civil Procedure Rule 17, courts can appoint a guardian ad litem or issue

20

another appropriate order to protect a minor or incompetent person.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2); see

21

also Local Rule 202(a). The court is under a “legal obligation to consider whether an

22

incompetent person is adequately protected.” United States v. 30.64 Acres of Land, 795 F.2d

23

796, 805 (9th Cir. 1986)); see also Davis v. Walker, 745 F.3d 1303, 1310 n.6 (9th Cir. 2014).

24

However, the obligation of the court to appoint a guardian ad litem pursuant to Rule 17(c) does

25

not arise until after a determination of incompetence has been made by the court in which the

26

issue was raised. See, e.g., Forte v. County of Merced, 2013 WL 3282957, at *3 (E.D. Cal. June

27

27, 2013) (citing Ferrelli v. River Manor Health Care Ctr., 323 F.3d 196, 201 (2d Cir. 2003)).

28

////
2

1

The standard for determining competency is supplied by the law of the plaintiff’s

2

domicile. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(b)(1). Plaintiff is domiciled in California. Under California

3

law, a party is incompetent “if he or she lacks the capacity to understand the nature or

4

consequences of the proceeding, or is unable to assist counsel in the preparation of the case.”

5

Golden Gate Way, LLC v. Stewart, 2012 WL 4482053, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 28, 2012) (citing In

6

re Jessica G., 93 Cal. App. 4th 1180, 1186 (2001)); see also Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 372(a)

7

(“When ... a person who lacks legal capacity to make decisions ... is a party, that person shall

8

appear either by a guardian or conservator of the estate or by a guardian ad litem.”).

9

Under Rule 17(c), a district court must hold a competency hearing “when substantial

10

evidence of incompetence is presented.” Allen v. Calderon, 408 F.3d 1150, 1153 (9th Cir. 2005).

11

The Ninth Circuit has not clearly stated what constitutes “substantial evidence” of incompetence

12

warranting such a hearing. See Hoang Minh Tran v. Gore, 2013 WL 1625418, at *3 (S.D. Cal.

13

April 15, 2013); see also Shack v. Knipp, 2012 WL 4111652, at *5 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 17, 2012).

14

However, the Ninth Circuit has indicated that sworn declarations from the allegedly incompetent

15

litigant, sworn declarations or letters from treating psychiatrists or psychologists, and medical

16

records may be considered in this regard. See Allen, 408 F.3d at 1152–54; see also Hoang Minh

17

Tran, 2013 WL 1625418, at *3. Such evidence must speak to the court’s concern as to whether

18

the person in question is able to meaningfully take part in the proceedings. See AT&T Mobility,

19

LLC v. Yeager, 143 F. Supp. 3d 1042, 1050 (E.D. Cal. 2015) (citing In re Christina B., 19 Cal.

20

App. 4th 1441, 1450 (1993)).

21

Analysis

22

In the motion for a competency hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad litem,

23

plaintiff argues that his mental illness has “taken from him” the cognitive skills necessary for him

24

to represent himself without the assistance of counsel or a guardian ad litem. Plaintiff alleges that

25

he has and will continue to experience frequent mental health crises. In the motion for a

26

competency hearing, plaintiff describes his mental health diagnoses, his mental health history and

27

the medication he takes to treat his mental health conditions. The undersigned has reviewed

28

plaintiff’s medical records regarding his mental health attached to his motion for a competency
3

1
2

hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad litem.
The undersigned acknowledges that plaintiff has been diagnosed with a mental illness for

3

which he receives treatment. However, the record in this case demonstrates that plaintiff is

4

capable of understanding the nature and consequences of this proceeding. Plaintiff has

5

competently litigated this action since he filed it approximately three years ago. The record

6

demonstrates that plaintiff has recently conducted discovery. On October 24, 2019, plaintiff filed

7

a 71 pages long motion to compel. (ECF No. 137.) Plaintiff’s October 24, 2019 motion to

8

compel is coherent and organized.

9

Despite having serious mental illness issues, plaintiff has competently litigated this action.

10

Plaintiff has demonstrated an ability to meaningfully participate in these proceedings. The record

11

demonstrates that plaintiff has the capacity to understand the nature and consequences of these

12

proceedings. For these reasons, the undersigned finds that plaintiff is competent to litigate this

13

action. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for a competency hearing and for appointment of a

14

guardian ad litem is denied.

15

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

16

1.

Plaintiff’s motion to file under seal his motion for a competency hearing and for

17

appointment of a guardian ad litem, and the attached medical records, (ECF No. 136)

18

is granted;

19
20
21

2. Plaintiff’s motion for a competency hearing and for appointment of a guardian ad
litem is denied.
Dated: November 13, 2019

22
23
24
25
Owen2750.seal
26
27
28
4