Gardner v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 17 the Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. Plaintiffs shall have until 9/25/2017, in which to retain substitute counsel who shall make an appearance in accordance with the requirements of the Local Rules of Practice. The cl erk of the court shall serve the plaintiffs with a copy of this order at their last known address. The 16 Motion to Stay is GRANTED to the extent that it is stayed for 30 days. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 8/25/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
ROBERT J. GARDNER, et al.,
Case No. 2:17-cv-00352-PAL
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE
DEPARTMENT, et al.,
(Mot Stay – ECF No. 16)
(Mot WD Atty – ECF No. 17)
Before the court is counsel for plaintiff Potter Law Offices’ Motion to Withdraw as
Counsel and Stay Proceedings (ECF Nos. 16, 17). The motion represents that plaintiffs’ counsel’s
present physical condition and health materially impairs his ability to represent his clients. The
law firm consists of Mr. Potter and his son, who is unable to take over representation without his
father’s ability to practice law. Mr. Potter seeks leave to withdraw as counsel of record, and a stay
of proceedings while his clients obtain substitute counsel. An Amended Scheduling Order (ECF
No. 15) was entered April 18, 2017, giving the parties until November 10, 2017, to complete
Plaintiffs Robert and Kim Gardner have individual claims, and are also co-special
administrators of the estate of Garrett Gardner, deceased. Courts routinely adhere “to the general
rule prohibiting pro se plaintiffs from pursuing claims on behalf of others in a representative
capacity.” See, e.g., Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc., 546 F.3d 661, 664–65 (9th Cir. 2008) (collecting
cases). Additionally, estates may not proceed pro se in federal court. Joubert v. Brown Williamson
Tobacco Corp., 466 F. App’x 588 (9th Cir. 2012) (affirming dismissal of action in which pro se
plaintiff alleged claims as the personal representative of his mother’s estate) (citing Simon, 546
F.3d at 664); Jones v. Corr. Med. Servs., 401 F.3d 950, 951–52 (8th Cir. 2005) (non-attorney
administrator of decedent’s estate may not proceed pro se on behalf of estate); Iannaccone v. Law,
142 F.3d 553, 559 (2nd Cir. 1998) (administrator of estate may not appear pro se on behalf of
estate); Pridgen v. Andresen, 113 F.3d 391, 393 (2nd Cir. 1997) (executrix may not appear pro se
on behalf of estate).
Having reviewed and considered the matter, and for good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Motion to Withdraw (ECF No. 17) is GRANTED.
2. Plaintiffs shall have until September 25, 2017, in which to retain substitute counsel
who shall make an appearance in accordance with the requirements of the Local Rules
3. Plaintiffs’ failure to timely comply with this order by obtaining substitute counsel may
result in the imposition of sanctions which may include a recommendation to the
district judge that plaintiffs’ complaint be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 41(b).
4. The clerk of the court shall serve the plaintiffs with a copy of this order at their last
Robert J. Gardner, Co-Special Administrator
Kim Gardner, Co-Special Administrator
Estate of Garrett E. Gardner
27231 Calle Del Cid
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
5. The Motion to Stay (ECF No. 16) is GRANTED to the extent that it is stayed for 30
DATED this 25th day of August, 2017.
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?