Brown et al v. Alexander et al

Filing 116

ORDER APPOINTING JOHN BURKE AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR JANE DOE 1 & 2. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 12/16/15. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
JENNIFER BROWN,

10

Case No. 13-cv-01451-RS

Plaintiff,
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

v.
12
JON ALEXANDER, et al.,

13

ORDER APPOINTING JOHN BURKE
AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR JANE
DOES 1 & 2

Defendants.
14
15
This civil rights case filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983, recently reassigned to the

16
17

undersigned, involves claims that defendants the Del Norte County and its employees violated

18

plaintiffs’ constitutional rights. Underlying these constitutional claims is a long, heated dispute

19

between plaintiff Jennifer Brown and her ex-husband Daniel Crockett. Jennifer Brown and her

20

father, Barry Brown, have accused Jennifer’s ex-husband, Daniel Crockett, of molesting his twin

21

daughters. The Browns made these incendiary accusations in divorce and dependency

22

proceedings in Del Norte County. At the conclusion of those proceedings, the Del Norte County

23

courts awarded Crockett physical custody of the children and found that the complaints of

24

molestation were unfounded. The Browns have filed this lawsuit on behalf of themselves and the

25

minor children against the County of Del Norte and its employees, averring various constitutional

26

violations committed at Crockett’s behest.1

27
1

28

Crockett successfully moved to dismiss the claims against him and is no longer a defendant.

1

Initially, Barry Brown was appointed to represent the minor plaintiffs’ interests as guardian

2

ad litem, but defendants successfully challenged Barry Brown’s fitness to serve as the children’s

3

representative because he was not a neutral party. After granting defendants’ motion to remove

4

plaintiff Barry Brown as the minor plaintiffs’ guardian ad litem, the court ordered the parties each

5

to submit three names of potential guardians ad litem and made quite clear that members of the

6

Brown or Crockett families were not acceptable options.

7

Defendants submitted one name: Amanda Uhreen, who is a courtroom clerk for the Del

8

Norte County Superior Court and Crockett’s live-in girlfriend. Plaintiffs object to Uhreen’s

9

appointment because she was involved in the state-court disputes and is not a neutral party in this
matter. They propose appointing John Burke, a criminal investigator with the Humbolt County

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

District Attorney, or Paul and Ronell Nicholson, Jennifer Brown’s sister and brother-in-law.

12

Defendants have also objected to these proposed guardians ad litem on the basis that the

13

Nicholsons are members of the Brown family, and therefore not neutral parties. Burke, defendants

14

contend, is also an interested party because he submitted reports against Crockett in the

15

proceedings in state court. Defendants further point out that the minor plaintiffs likely no longer

16

have any remaining claims and should be dismissed from the suit.

17

The parties have offered no good options. There are reasons to question the neutrality of

18

each proposed guardian ad litem, but the court is reluctant to entertain a motion to dismiss the

19

minor plaintiffs without first appointing a guardian ad litem. Left with these limited, imperfect

20

options, the best course is to select John Burke, who appears to be the most neutral proposed

21

guardian ad litem. The Nicholsons are members of the Brown family, and Uhreen is in many

22

practical respects part of the Crockett family. Thus, these three proposed guardians ad litem are

23

insufficiently neutral parties to represent the children in this matter. Accordingly, Burke is

24

appointed to serve as the minor plaintiffs’ guardian ad litem. If defendants intend to file a motion

25

to dismiss the minor plaintiffs’ claims, they should do so promptly.

26
27
28

ORDER APPOINTING GUARDIAN AD LITEM
CASE NO. 13-cv-01451-RS

2

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

2
3
4
5

Dated: December 16, 2015
______________________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER APPOINTING GUARDIAN AD LITEM
CASE NO. 13-cv-01451-RS

3