Cortez v. United States of America
This text of Cortez v. United States of America (Cortez v. United States of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHARLES CORTEZ, et al., Case No. 23-cv-01222-MMC
8 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL'S MOTION TO 9 v. WITHDRAW; STAYING ACTION AND VACATING DEADLINES; VACATING 10 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., MAY 17, 2024, HEARING; DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 11 Defendants. COUNSEL
12 13 Before the Court is the Motion, filed April 3, 2024, by John L. Burris, Ben 14 Nisenbaum, and Christopher Dean (collectively, "Law Offices of John L. Burris") "for 15 Leave of Court to Withdraw as Counsel for Plaintiffs Charles Cortez and Hilma Cortez," 16 which motion, as clarified in a supplemental filing submitted April 11, 2024, seeks an 17 order allowing the Law Offices of John L. Burris to withdraw as counsel not only for 18 Charles Cortez and Hilma Cortez, who are the parents of decedent Michael Cortez, but 19 also for three minors, who are the decedent's children, specifically, (1) J.S., who appears 20 through her guardian ad litem Serina Sagon, (2) L.C., who appears through her guardian 21 ad litem Ashley Mabutas, and (3) M.P.C., who has not appeared to date in the instant 22 action.1 Although all said clients were served with the above filings, none has filed a 23 response thereto. Defendant United States of America filed a statement of non- 24 opposition, in which it includes two requests. Having read and considered the parties' 25
26 1 In a supplemental declaration submitted in support of the instant motion, counsel states that, after the operative complaint was filed, M.P.C.'s mother, Justinne Pasion, 27 retained the Law Offices of John L. Burris, and that she is acting as M.P.C's guardian ad 1 respective written submissions, the Court deems the matter suitable for decision thereon, 2 VACATES the hearing scheduled for May 17, 2024, and rules as follows. 3 For the reasons stated by the Law Offices of John L. Burris, and good cause 4 appearing, the motion to withdraw is hereby GRANTED. 5 To the extent the United States requests that the Court continue all pending 6 deadlines until sixty days after new counsel has appeared for plaintiffs, the Court declines 7 to do so, as it is unclear when, or whether, new counsel will appear. The Court will, 8 however, afford plaintiffs an opportunity to obtain new counsel, and, accordingly, hereby 9 STAYS the above-titled action until July 26, 2024. If, as of July 26, 2024, new counsel 10 has not appeared, the Court, unless information counseling against dismissal has been 11 submitted, will dismiss without prejudice the claims asserted on behalf of the minor 12 plaintiffs, as they and their respective guardians ad litem cannot appear without counsel, 13 see Johns v. County of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding “guardian 14 or parent cannot bring a lawsuit on behalf of a minor in federal court without retaining a 15 lawyer”); the instant action will then proceed on behalf of Charles Cortez and Hilma 16 Cortez only, each of whom may appear pro se. Further, in light of such stay, the current 17 dates, namely the June 7, 2024, deadline for defendant to file a reply in support of its 18 pending motion to dismiss, the July 19, 2024, hearing on defendant's motion to dismiss, 19 and the August 16, 2024, Case Management Conference, as well as the deadlines 20 associated with said Conference, are hereby VACATED, and will be reset, as 21 appropriate, after the stay is lifted. 22 To the extent the United States requests that it be allowed to serve any filings on 23 the Law Offices of John L. Burris, which, in turn, would be responsible for forwarding 24 them to each of plaintiffs, the request, given the stay of proceedings, is hereby DENIED 25 without prejudice. 26 Lastly, the Law Offices of John L. Burris is hereby DIRECTED to serve, no later 27 than May 10, 2024, a copy of the instant order on Charles Cortez, Hilma Cortez, and 1 such service no later than May 13, 2024. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 4 || Dated: May 8, 2024 : INE M. CHESNEY 5 United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Cortez v. United States of America, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cortez-v-united-states-of-america-cand-2024.