J.R. v. San Marcos Unified School District
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Janis L. Sammartino (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed a Petition to Appoint Guardians ad Litem that contained the full name of a minor plaintiff. The court struck the petition sua sponte for violating local rules regarding the redaction of minor children's names and allowed the plaintiff to file a redacted version within seven days.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Petition to Appoint Guardians ad Litem (ECF No. 1-2) is struck.“Accordingly, the Court sua sponte STRIKES the Petition.” | agree with court The order cites General Order No. 514, which explicitly requires the redaction of minor children's names in filings. The order notes that the petition contained the full name of the minor plaintiff. Striking the filing is a direct application of the stated local rule. The court also provides a mechanism for cure (refiling within seven days), which is a standard procedural remedy for such violations. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It identifies the specific violation (failure to redact minor's name), cites the governing local rule (General Order No. 514), and cites persuasive authority (Fotinos) supporting the court's power to strike such filings. The remedy (strike and allow refiling) is appropriate and standard.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 J.R., by and through her Guardians ad Case No.: 21-CV-1752 JLS (AGS) Litem; NICOLE REED; and RONALD 12 REED, ORDER SUA SPONTE STRIKING 13 PETITION TO APPOINT Plaintiffs, GUARDIANS AD LITEM 14 v. 15 (ECF No. 1-2) SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL 16 DISTRICT, 17 Defendant. 18 19 Presently before the Court is minor Plaintiff J.R.’s ex parte Petition to appoint her 20 parents, Nicole Reed and Ronald Reed, as Guardians ad Litem (ECF No. 1-2). Plaintiff’s 21 Petition contains the full name of the minor Plaintiff. Pursuant to this Court’s General 22 Order No. 514, “counsel or parties shall be required to remove or redact the . . . Names of 23 Minor Children. If the involvement of a minor child must be mentioned, only the initials 24 of that child should be used.” See also Fotinos v. Fotinos, No. C 12-953 CW, 2014 WL 25 546083, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 7, 2014), aff’d, 644 F. App’x 793 (9th Cir. 2016) (striking 26 filings that improperly included minor child’s name). Accordingly, the Court sua sponte 27 /// 28 /// 1 || STRIKES the Petition. Plaintiff may file a redacted version of the Petition within seven 2 || days of the date of this order. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Dated: October 12, 2021 tt 5 jen Janis L. Sammartino 6 United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28