Basque et al. v. County of Placer et al.

Filing 36

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/26/17 ORDERING that Plaintiff Ryan D. Basque's Request for appointment as the guardian ad litem for non-party minors S.B. and E.B. is GRANTED. The Court finds that this appointment is in S.B. and E.B.s best interests. Accordingly, the Court hereby appoints Plaintiff Ryan D. Basque as guardian ad litem for S.B. and E.B., for the purpose of this action.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
1 Mark E. Merin (State Bar No. 043849) Paul H. Masuhara (State Bar No. 289805) 2 LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN 3 4 5 6 7 1010 F Street, Suite 300 Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: (916) 443-6911 Facsimile: (916) 447-8336 E-Mail: mark@markmerin.com paul@markmerin.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs RYAN D. BASQUE and DENISE M. BASQUE 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RYAN D. BASQUE, et al., 12 13 14 15 vs. COUNTY OF PLACER, et al., Defendants. I. 17 minors S.B. and E.B. II. 20 24 25 STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS Plaintiff Ryan D. Basque (“Ryan”)1 is the father of non-party minors, S.B. and E.B. Declaration of Ryan D. Basque (“Ryan Decl.”), ¶¶2-3. 22 23 INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Ryan D. Basque requests the Court’s appointment as the guardian ad litem for non-party 19 21 PLAINTIFF RYAN D. BASQUE’S UNOPPOSED REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR NON-PARTY MINORS S.B. AND E.B.; ORDER THEREON Plaintiffs, 16 18 SACRAMENTO DIVISION Case No. 2:16-cv-02760-KJN S.B. and E.B. potentially have claims against Defendants in this action which could be brought through this action and in this Court. Ryan Decl., ¶5. Those claims, if asserted, would arise out of the same conduct which gave rise to Plaintiffs’ individual claims. Id.; see also ECF No. 29-3 at 4 & 29-4 [taser video at 00:08-00:15, wherein S.B. and E.B. appear during subject incident]. 26 27 28 30 1 The two Plaintiffs to this action, Plaintiff Ryan D. Basque and Denise M. Basque (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), share a common surname. For clarity, Plaintiffs are referred to by their first names. 1 PLAINTIFF RYAN D. BASQUE’S UNOPPOSED REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR NON-PARTY MINORS S.B. AND E.B. 31 Basque v. County of Placer, United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:16-cv-02760-KJN 1 2 3 4 The parties to this action have reached agreement on the terms of a proposed settlement. See ECF No. 32. Terms of the settlement are inclusive of the claims of S.B. and E.B. Ryan Decl., ¶6. Because the settlement seeks to resolve claims of minors, special procedures will apply. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c) & E.D. Cal. L.R. 202. 5 6 7 Therefore, Plaintiff Ryan requests the Court’s appointment as the guardian ad litem for his minor children, S.B. and E.B., in order to represent their interests in this action, notwithstanding that S.B. and E.B. are currently non-parties to this action. 8 III. 9 10 11 12 13 14 “A minor … who does not have a duly appointed representative may sue by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem. The court must appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor … who is unrepresented in an action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2); E.D. Cal. L.R. 202(a) (“Appointment of Representative or Guardian”); see also Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 372(a)(1) (“A guardian ad litem may be appointed in any case when it is deemed by the court in which the action or proceeding is prosecuted, or by a judge thereof, expedient to appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the minor…”). 15 16 17 18 19 “A court has broad discretion in ruling on a guardian ad litem application.” Williams v. Superior Court, 147 Cal. App. 4th 36, 47, 54 Cal. Rptr. 3d 13 (2007). When there is no conflict of interest, the guardian ad litem appointment is usually made on ex parte application and involves minimal exercise of discretion by the trial court. In re Marriage of Caballero, 27 Cal. App. 4th 1139, 1149, 33 Cal. Rptr. 2d 46 (1994). 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 REQUEST FOR APPOINTNMENT Though not yet parties to this action, because S.B. and E.B. potentially have claims that could be asserted in this action and which the parties seek to resolve through settlement, see Basque Decl., ¶¶5-6, Plaintiff Ryan requests the Court’s appointment as guardian ad litem for S.B. and E.B. in this action, for the purpose of pursuing and settling their potential claims. Plaintiff Ryan is aware of no conflict of interest and, if so appointed, will protection of the minors’ interest in this litigation. See Basque Decl., ¶7. This request for appointment as guardian ad litem is unopposed by Defendants. IV. CONCLUSION Plaintiff Ryan D. Basque respectfully requests the Court’s appointment as the guardian ad litem 2 PLAINTIFF RYAN D. BASQUE’S UNOPPOSED REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR NON-PARTY MINORS S.B. AND E.B. 31 Basque v. County of Placer, United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:16-cv-02760-KJN 1 2 for non-party minors S.B. and E.B. Dated: July 25, 2017 Respectfully Submitted, 3 4 By: __________________________________ Mark E. Merin Paul H. Masuhara 5 6 LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN 7 Attorneys for Plaintiffs RYAN D. BASQUE and DENISE M. BASQUE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ORDER 17 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2) and E.D. Cal. L.R. 202(a), the Court hereby GRANTS 18 Plaintiff Ryan D. Basque’s request for appointment as the guardian ad litem for non-party minors S.B. 19 and E.B. The Court finds that this appointment is in S.B. and E.B.’s best interests. Accordingly, the 20 Court hereby appoints Plaintiff Ryan D. Basque as guardian ad litem for S.B. and E.B., for the purpose 21 of this action. 22 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 26, 2017 24 25 26 27 28 30 3 PLAINTIFF RYAN D. BASQUE’S UNOPPOSED REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR NON-PARTY MINORS S.B. AND E.B. 31 Basque v. County of Placer, United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:16-cv-02760-KJN

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?