Opinion
CV 21-3845-VAP-KS
11-14-2022
M.M.G. et al. v. City of Los Angeles et al.
Present: The Honorable: Karen L. Stevenson, United States Magistrate Judge
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MINOR PLAINTIFF M.M.G. SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FROM THE CASE FOR THE FAILURE TO RETAIN COUNSEL [DKT NO. 29]
On May 6, 2021, Plaintiffs filed a civil rights complaint against the City of Los Angeles and ten Doe Defendants arising out of alleged actions on the part of Los Angeles Police Officers during a protest on May 30, 2020. (Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff M.M.G. is a minor and Plaintiff Mark Gould, an adult, is M.M.G.'s father. (Id. at 4.) Both Plaintiffs were represented by attorney Dale K. Galipo of the Law Offices of Dale Galipo. (Id. at 38.) On May 7, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiffs' Application for the Appointment of James K. Sadigh as Guardian Ad Litem for Minor Plaintiff M.M.G. (Dkt. No. 5)
On September 23, 2022, presiding District Judge Virginia A. Phillips granted a motion by counsel Galipo to withdraw from the case. (Dkt. No. 29.) However, in doing so, the Court noted that Local Civil Rule 83-2.2.1 requires a non-attorney guardian for a minor to be represented by counsel. (Id. at 4.) Therefore, the Court ordered Plaintiff M.M.G. “to retain new counsel on or before October 31, 2022,” and that the “[f]ailure to do so may result in M.M.G.'s dismissal as a party in this action.” (Id.)
To date, Plaintiffs have not responded to the Court's September 23, 2022 Order and Plaintiff M.M.G. has not filed a substitution of counsel indicating that M.M.G has retained a new attorney.
Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS Plaintiffs TO SHOW CAUSE, no later than Monday, November 21, 2022, why minor Plaintiff M.M.G. should not be dismissed from the case for the failure to retain counsel.
To discharge this Order, Plaintiffs must choose one of the following options by the November 21, 2022 deadline:
(1) File an appropriate substitution of counsel indicating that Plaintiff M.M.G. has retained counsel in compliance with Judge Phillips's September 23, 2022 Order;
(2) File a response to this Order, of no more than three pages, showing good cause for the delay in retaining new counsel and informing the Court when new counsel for M.M.G. will make an appearance and file an appropriate substitution of counsel;
OR
(3) File a request for voluntary dismissal of M.M.G. as a party to this case.
Failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause will result in a recommendation that M.M.G. be dismissed from the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.