United States of America v. City of Seattle
ORDER denying nonparty Marguerite Richard's 480 Motion to Intervene. Further, the court DIRECTS the Clerk to refrain from placing any future filings by Ms. Richard on the docket for this case, unless the filing is a motion for reconsideration or a notice of appeal of this order. Signed by Judge James L. Robart.(PM) cc: Ms. Richard via first class mail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
CASE NO. C12-1282JLR
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
CITY OF SEATTLE,
Before the court is nonparty Marguerite Richard’s motion “for a chance to testify
on Police Department in City Hall for which the court has ordered, but no change.”
(Mot. (Dkt. # 480) at 1.) Ms. Richard asks to the court to order Mayor Jenny Durkan,
City Attorney Pete Holmes, and Seattle Chief of Police Carmen Best to conduct “an open
meeting with Q & A every month because it has never happened systematically in Seattle
in its history.” (Mot. at 2.) Ms. Richard is proceeding pro se, and the court liberally
construes her filing as a motion to intervene in these proceedings.
ORDER - 1
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a), to intervene in this action as of right,
Ms. Richard must establish that she has (1) “an unconditional right to intervene by a
federal statute,” or (2) “an interest relating to the . . . transaction that is the subject of the
action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a). To intervene permissively under Rule 24(b), Ms. Richard
must show that she has (1) “a conditional right to intervene by a federal statute,” or (2) “a
claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of law or fact.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b)(1). The burden is on the proposed intervenor to demonstrate that
the conditions for intervention are satisfied. United States v. Alisal Water Corp., 370
F.3d 915, 919 (9th Cir. 2004).
Ms. Richard fails to demonstrate that the conditions for either intervention as of
right or for permissive intervention are met. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)-(b)(1).
Accordingly, the court DENIES her motion to intervene (Dkt. # 480). Further, the court
DIRECTS the Clerk to refrain from placing any future filings by Ms. Richard on the
docket for this case, unless the filing is a motion for reconsideration or a notice of appeal
of this order.
Dated this 23rd day of August, 2018.
JAMES L. ROBART
United States District Judge
ORDER - 2
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?