Galindo v. City of San Francisco

Background

On October 10, 2020, San Francisco police officers shot and killed Cesar Vargas. Dora Galindo, Juan Antonio Vargas, and Rocio Anel Vargas—identified as Vargas’s mother, father, and sister—sued Officer Kyle Roach, Sergeant Nicholas Delgado, and the City and County of San Francisco. They asserted claims on their own behalf and as successors in interest to Vargas. Their claims included alleged violations of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with various state-law claims.

The defendants moved for summary judgment on all claims. They argued that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring their only federal claim. The plaintiffs did not respond to that argument in their opposition. The court addressed Fourth Amendment standing before the scheduled February 22, 2024 hearing because it determined that the standing problem might be curable.

Legal standard

Generally, only the person whose Fourth Amendment rights were violated may sue to enforce those rights. In a § 1983 action, however, survivors may bring an excessive-force claim on behalf of a person who was killed if state law authorizes a survival action and the plaintiff satisfies that state’s requirements.

California law provides that a claim generally survives the claimant’s death and passes to the decedent’s successor in interest. A personal representative, or a successor in interest if there is no personal representative, may bring the action. California law requires a successor in interest to file an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury containing specified information, including the decedent’s name, statements about estate administration and the successor’s right to sue, and a certified copy of the death certificate.

Parents’ standing

The court stated that Dora Galindo and Juan Antonio Vargas may be intestate successors because they are Cesar Vargas’s parents and the record contained no evidence that he had a surviving spouse or children. But they had not provided the affidavit or declaration required by California Code of Civil Procedure § 377.32. The court therefore concluded that they did not yet have standing to assert a Fourth Amendment claim under § 1983.

Sister’s standing

Rocio Anel Vargas is Cesar Vargas’s sister. Under the succession provision discussed by the court, siblings inherit only if there is no surviving child or parent. The court noted that Rocio Anel Vargas had not provided an affidavit or declaration showing that she qualified as a successor in interest. Based on the summary-judgment record, the court concluded that she did not have standing to assert a Fourth Amendment claim under § 1983 at that time.

Order

The court ordered the plaintiffs to file, by February 20, 2024, an affidavit or declaration satisfying California Code of Civil Procedure § 377.32. It warned that failure to do so could result in dismissal of the Fourth Amendment claim for lack of standing. This order did not itself dismiss that claim or rule on the defendants’ summary-judgment motion as a whole.