Opinion
2:20-CV-1665-RSM-DWC
05-18-2022
NYLYSHA STARVION BELAFON ARADON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SNOHOMISH COUNTY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DIRECTING STATUS REPORTS
David W. Christel United States Magistrate Judge.
On August 11, 2021 the Court appointed Jo-Hanna Read to serve as guardian ad litem to minor Plaintiff A.H. Dkt. 45 (“Order”). In seeking the appointment of a guardian ad litem for A.H., Plaintiffs' counsel, Patrick A. Trudell and Robert Scott Bowen, requested that the Court confirm, authorize, and direct Mr. Trudell and Mr. Bowen to continue to appear as counsel on behalf of A.H. Dkt. 40; see Dkt. 40-1. In the Order, the Court declined to authorize Mr. Trudell and Mr. Bowen to continue as counsel for A.H. and determined the decision regarding who would be retained to pursue the claims on behalf of A.H. was to be made by Ms. Read. Dkt. 45 at 4. At this time, Ms. Read as not indicated who is appearing as counsel on behalf of A.H. The Court also notes Ms. Read has not entered an appearance and the record does not reflect Ms. Read is receiving notice of the docket activity in this case.
Further, in the transcript from the March 8, 2022 hearing, Ms. Read stated she was the guardian ad litem for the minor plaintiffs. Dkt. 137 at 4, ln. 4-5. At this time, A.L. has not been appointed a guardian ad litem.
Therefore, on or before June 1, 2022, the Court orders:
1. Ms. Read to file a written status report addressing whether she has retained counsel to represent A.H.'s claims in this case and, if so, who she has retained;
2. Ms. Read to file a notice of appearance as the Guardian ad Litem for A.H.; and
3. Counsel for each party to file a status report regarding whether a guardian ad litem should be appointed for A.L.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order by e-mail and United States Postal Service to:
Jo-Hanna Read
220 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1250
Seattle, Washington 98121
jolawyer@read-law.com paul@read-law.com
The Clerk is also directed to update the docket to correctly reflect the parties named in the Complaint by: adding A.H. and A.L. as plaintiffs and removing Snohomish County Superior Court and Snohomish County Volunteer Guardian Ad Litem Program as defendants.
The Court notes Plaintiffs properly named Snohomish County as the Defendant, identifying “Snohomish County through the Snohomish County Superior Court and its VGAL Program” as the defendant. Dkt. 1-1, ¶ 2.5; see Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978). The Snohomish County Superior Court and the VGAL Program are not proper defendants; rather, the County is the proper defendant and Snohomish County Superior Court and the VGAL Program do not need to be identified as separate defendants on the docket.