Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 18, 2022

United States v. Malhas

Judge
Beth Freeman
Docket
5:19-cv-03709
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In United States v. Malhas, Judge Freeman ordered a referral for a guardian or conservator and kept the case stayed.

Who this affects

Wade Malhas, whose interests must be represented through a guardian ad litem, conservator, or another identified mechanism; his current counsel; the United States; and the pending case, which remains stayed.

What happened

In United States v. Malhas, the government asked the court to appoint someone to protect Wade Malhas’s interests because the parties agreed that he has dementia and cannot communicate with his lawyer. The government also asked for a referral to the Orange County Public Guardian as an alternative.

The court explained that its Federal Pro Bono Program could help find a volunteer lawyer but could not find a guardian. Because Mr. Malhas’s current lawyer had not been relieved, the court ordered that lawyer to refer the matter to the Orange County Public Guardian for a guardian or conservator of Mr. Malhas’s estate.

The parties must file a joint update by May 20, 2022, about the referral’s progress, and the case will remain stayed until a way to represent Mr. Malhas’s interests is identified. Judge Beth Labson Freeman issued the order on March 18, 2022.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
United States v. Malhas · No. 5:19-cv-03709
Judge
Beth Freeman
Date
Mar. 18, 2022

Background

The government filed a consent motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c). It asked the court to identify a guardian ad litem—someone appointed to protect and represent the interests of a person who cannot adequately do so in the case—for Defendant Wade Malhas. The parties agreed that Malhas suffers from dementia and cannot communicate with counsel. Alternatively, the government asked the court to refer the matter to the Orange County Public Guardian for a conservatorship or similar arrangement.

Court’s Analysis

Rule 17(c) requires a court to appoint a guardian ad litem or issue another appropriate order to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action. The court noted that guardians ad litem may be found through various programs or organizations. But the court’s Federal Pro Bono Program had resources to seek volunteer counsel, not guardians ad litem. The court therefore determined that Malhas’s interests needed to be represented through a guardian ad litem or another arrangement found by other means.

Order

Because the court had not yet relieved Malhas’s current counsel, it ordered that counsel to submit a referral regarding a guardian ad litem or conservator of Malhas’s estate to the Orange County Public Guardian. The parties must file a joint status update by May 20, 2022, describing the referral’s progress. The case will remain stayed until a mechanism for representing Malhas’s interests is identified through the referral or other means. The opinion does not expressly state that the motion was granted or denied; it sets out these required steps instead.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.