Saxton v. County of Sonoma
- Susan Illston
- 3:21-cv-09499
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Saxton v. County of Sonoma, Judge Illston directed Saxton to file a motion for appointment of a guardian ad litem for M.J. by April 7, 2023.
Michelle Saxton and M.J., concerning M.J.’s representation and the required filings for the survivorship action.
What happened
In Saxton v. County of Sonoma, the court noted that Michelle Saxton had not filed a motion seeking appointment of a guardian ad litem for M.J.
The court also noted that Saxton had not filed the affidavit or declaration required under California law for a survivorship action. The court explained that these requirements apply to the plaintiffs’ civil-rights survivorship action.
Judge Susan Illston directed Saxton to file the guardian-ad-litem motion no later than April 7, 2023. The court said the motion could include the information and materials required by California law.
The detailed version
- Saxton v. County of Sonoma · No. 3:21-cv-09499
- Susan Illston
- Mar. 30, 2023
Background
While reviewing the docket, the court observed that Michelle Saxton had not filed a motion to appoint a guardian ad litem for M.J. A guardian ad litem is a person appointed to represent someone in court who cannot represent themselves in the proceeding.
The court also observed that Saxton had not filed an affidavit or declaration required by California Code of Civil Procedure § 377.32. The court stated that this filing is required in survivorship actions, including a civil-rights claim brought on behalf of a deceased person when state law authorizes the claim to continue.
Court’s Action
The court directed Saxton to file a motion for appointment of a guardian ad litem no later than April 7, 2023. The court stated that the motion could include the information and materials required by California Code of Civil Procedure § 377.32.
The opinion addresses filing and representation requirements. It does not decide the merits of the claims against the defendants.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.