Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01513/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01513-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SETH ARELLANO, a minor, by and through 

his guardian ad litem BERTHA HERNANDEZ,

 Plaintiff, 

 v.

CITY OF HANFORD and DOES 1-10,

 Defendants.

1:15-cv-1513-LJO-SMS

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND 

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S PETITION 

FOR ORDER APPOINTING 

GUARDIAN AD LITEM (Doc. 2) AND 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

(Doc. 7)

Along with his complaint, Plaintiff Seth Arellano (“Plaintiff”) filed a petition to appoint his 

grandmother, Bertha Hernandez, as his guardian ad litem for purposes of this case. Doc. 2. The Court 

finds that it is reasonable and necessary to appoint a guardian ad litem for Plaintiff. There also does not 

appear to be any conflict of interest or other reason disfavoring the requested appointment. Accordingly, 

the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s petition and appoints Ms. Hernandez as Plaintiff’s guardian ad litem for 

the purposes of this case.

Defendant City of Hanford (“the City”) moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s Monell1claim. Doc. 7 at 7. 

The City also moves to dismiss Bertha Hernandez as a Plaintiff as she does not assert any causes of 

action. Id. at 8. 

In his opposition, Plaintiff “concedes that [Bertha Hernandez] is only suing in her capacity as 

guardian ad litem and makes no individual claims in this matter.” Doc. 8 at 7. In its half-page reply in 

support of its motion to dismiss, the City acknowledges Plaintiff’s Monell claim “may satisfy pleading 

 

1

See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978).

Case 1:15-cv-01513-SMS Document 12 Filed 12/10/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

2

requirements.” Doc. 9 at 3. After the City submitted its reply, Plaintiff filed a “Request for Telephonic 

Appearance” in which he confirms the City’s apparent concession that he “has indeed pled sufficient 

facts to establish his [Monell] claim,” and states his position that currently “there are no disputed issues 

before the court.” Doc. 10 at 1. The City did not file anything in response to Plaintiff’s request.

Accordingly, the Court:

1. APPOINTS Bertha Hernandez as Plaintiff’s guardian ad litem for the purposes of this case;

2. DENIES the City’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Monell claim; and

3. GRANTS the City’s motion to dismiss Ms. Hernandez as a party to this case. 

Any further amended complaint shall be filed on or before January 8, 2016.

The Court notes that Plaintiff has consented to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, Doc. 4, but the 

City has not indicated whether it so consents. The Court ORDERS the City to file and serve papers to 

indicate whether it consents to the conduct of all further proceedings by a U.S. Magistrate Judge on or 

before December 18, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 10, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01513-SMS Document 12 Filed 12/10/15 Page 2 of 2