Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01746/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01746-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 350
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1364 Auto Negligence

---

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

26

27

28

06cv1746

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PHILLIP YOUNG,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 06-CV-1746-L(RBB)

ORDER GRANTING IESHA JONES’

MOTION TO INTERVENE [doc. #10]

Iesha Jones (“applicant”) moves to intervene [doc. #10] in the above-captioned case.

Defendant United States filed a conditional opposition to applicant’s motion. Having fully

considered the matters presented, the Court will grant Iesha Jones leave to intervene in this

action. 

Discussion

Plaintiff Phillip Young is the father of Joshua Jones, who was struck by a USPS truck in

Oceanside, California on February 4, 2005, and died as a result of the injuries sustained in the

accident and as a result of defendant’s alleged negligence. Plaintiff brings this action under the

Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b), 2671-80. Iesha Jones, the mother of

Joshua Jones, moves under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 for permission to intervene as a plaintiff

in this action. She argues that she satisfies the standard of either joinder of right (Rule 24(a)(2)), or

permissive intervention (Rule 24(b)). 

Case 3:06-cv-01746-L-RBB Document 13 Filed 03/26/07 Page 1 of 3
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

26

27

28

2 06cv1746

Under Rule 24(a)(2), an applicant can move to intervene as of right when she files a timely

application and: 

when the applicant claims an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the

subject of the action and the applicant is so situated that the disposition of the action may

as a practical matter impair or impede the applicant’s ability to protect that interest,

unless the applicant’s interest is adequately represented by existing parties.

FED. R. CIV. P. 24(a)(2).

As noted above, defendant filed a conditional opposition to the applicant’s motion. In

addition to the United States of America, defendant contends that the proposed complaint-inintervention names two improper parties: the United States Postal Service (“USPS”) and a USPS

employee, Arnold Crowell. Although defendant has no objection to the applicant’s intervention

in the action, it does seek dismissal of the improper parties under the FTCA. The Ninth Circuit

has recognized that the United States is the sole proper defendant in a suit brought under the

FTCA. Allen v. Veterans Administration, 749 F.2d 1386, 1388 (9th Cir. 1984). The Court

further notes that the applicant has not filed a reply to defendant’s conditional opposition. The

Court construes the applicant’s silence with respect to this particular issue to be a consent to the

dismissal of the USPS and Arnold Crowell, the USPS employee. 

Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED granting applicant Iesha Jones’ motion to

intervene. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing with prejudice from this action the United

States Postal Service and Postal Employee Arnold Crowell. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED

Iesha Jones shall file her complaint-in-intervention not later than April 6, 2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 26, 2007

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

Case 3:06-cv-01746-L-RBB Document 13 Filed 03/26/07 Page 2 of 3
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

26

27

28

3 06cv1746

COPY TO: 

HON. RUBEN B. BROOKS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALL PARTIES/COUNSEL

Case 3:06-cv-01746-L-RBB Document 13 Filed 03/26/07 Page 3 of 3