Dunn v. HUD Urban Development

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EMMA DUNN and ALANA DUNN, Case No. 1:24-cv-00815-KES-BAM 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO AMEND A CAPTION 13 v. (Doc. 21) 14 HUD URBAN DEVELOPMENT, et al.,

15 Defendants. 16 17 On June 26, 2025, the Court issued an order directing the Clerk of the Court to amend the 18 caption and docket to reflect that the operative second amended complaint no longer names Ariel 19 Dunn, Richie Dunn, Aaliyah Dunn, and Ashanti Dunn as plaintiffs. (Doc. 19.) 20 On June 30, 2025, Plaintiffs Emma Dunn and Alana Dunn filed a motion to amend a 21 caption. (Doc. 21.) Although not entirely clear, Plaintiffs appear to request amendment to 22 reflect: “Minor’s Representation: When a minor is involved in a legal case, they are typically 23 represented by a guardian ad litem or a designated legal representative.” (Id. at 3.) 24 Having considered the motion, Plaintiffs’ request to amend the caption will be denied for 25 two main reasons. First, the operative second amended complaint names only Emma Dunn and 26 Alana Dunn as plaintiffs, and only Emma Dunn and Alana Dunn have signed that complaint. 27 (See Doc. 7.) As a result, amending the caption to add unnamed plaintiffs who have not signed 28 the complaint is neither appropriate nor warranted. See, e.g., L.R. 131(b) (requiring all pleadings 1 “be signed by the individual attorney for the party presenting them, or by the party involved if 2 that party is appearing in propria persona”.) If Plaintiffs wish to amend the complaint, then they 3 must file a motion seeking such leave under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. 4 Second, to the extent Plaintiffs, proceeding pro se, are seeking to represent minor 5 plaintiffs in this action, they may not do so. As the Court has previously explained, Plaintiffs 6 Emma Dunn and Alana Dunn may represent themselves pro se, but they may not represent 7 anyone else pro se, even as guardians ad litem. Indeed, a parent or guardian cannot bring an 8 action on behalf of a minor child without retaining a lawyer. See Johns v. County of San Diego, 9 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997); C.E. Pope Equity Trust v. U.S., 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 10 1987) (citations omitted), (“Although a non-attorney may appear in propria persona in his own 11 behalf, that privilege is personal to him. He has no authority to appear as an attorney for others 12 than himself.”). 13 As the Court has already amended the caption, Plaintiffs’ motion to amend a caption is 14 DENIED as Moot. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16

17 Dated: July 7, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28