The Robert & Linda Hardy Family Trust v. USFS

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: July 30, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-00934
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 THE ROBERT & LINDA HARDY No. 2:25-cv-00934-DAD-SCR FAMILY TRUST, 12 Plaintiff, 13 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO v. DISMISS CERTAIN DEFENDANTS, 14 SUBSTITUTE PLAINTIFFS, AND UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, et CONTINUE INITIAL SCHEDULING 15 al., CONFERENCE 16 Defendants. (Doc. No. 7) 17 18 19 On March 25, 2025, plaintiff The Robert & Linda Hardy Family Trust filed the complaint 20 initiating this action. (Doc. No. 1.) This case arises from the alleged trespass of defendants 21 United States Forest Service, Tom Schultz, Chief of the Forest Service, and the United States of 22 America on a property owned by plaintiff. (Id. at ¶ 8.) On July 28, 2025, the parties filed a joint 23 stipulation to dismiss defendants United States Forest Service and Tom Schultz pursuant to 24 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); to substitute Robert Hardy and Linda Hardy as 25 plaintiffs instead of The Robert & Linda Hardy Family Trust; and to continue the Initial 26 Scheduling Conference currently set for August 11, 2025 until October 27, 2025 in order to 27 accommodate counsel’s schedules and allow the parties more time to meet and confer. (Doc. No. 28 7.) 1 The stipulation identifies Robert Hardy and Linda Hardy as trustees of The Robert & 2 Linda Hardy Family Trust. (Id. at 1–2.) A substitution of trustees for a trust is appropriate under 3 Rule 17(a)(1)(E), which designates the trustee of an express trust as the real party in interest, and 4 under Rule 17(a)(3), which allows for the real party in interest to be substituted into the action. 5 “[T]he action proceeds as if it had been originally commenced by the real party in interest.” Fed. 6 R. Civ. P. 17(a)(3). “A Rule 17(a) substitution of plaintiffs should be liberally allowed when the 7 change is merely formal and in no way alters the original complaint’s factual allegations as to the 8 events or the participants.” Copelan v. Techtronics Indus. Co., 95 F. Supp. 3d 1230, 1235 (S.D. 9 Cal. 2015) (quoting Advanced Magnetics, Inc. v. Bayfront Partners, Inc., 106 F.3d 11, 20 (2d Cir. 10 1997)). Given plaintiff’s original allegations regarding defendants’ claimed trespass on a 11 property owned by the trust, substitution of the trustees as plaintiffs would be merely formal and 12 would in no way alter the original complaint’s factual allegations as to the events or participants. 13 (Doc. No. 1 at ¶ 8.) 14 Good cause appearing, and pursuant to the parties’ July 28, 2025 stipulation, the court 15 orders as follows: 16 1. Defendants United States Forest Service and Tom Schultz are hereby DISMISSED 17 without prejudice; 18 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect the termination of 19 these two defendants from this action; 20 3. Robert Hardy and Linda Hardy are substituted as the real parties in interest for 21 plaintiff The Robert & Linda Hardy Family Trust; 22 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect the substitution of 23 Robert Hardy and Linda Hardy as the real parties in interest for plaintiff The 24 Robert & Linda Hardy Family Trust; and 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 5. The court hereby VACATES the Initial Scheduling Conference currently set for 2 August 11, 2025 and RESETS the Initial Scheduling Conference to October 27, 3 2025 at 1:30 p.m. by Zoom. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. > | Dated: _ July 29, 2025 Dab A. 2, sxe 6 DALE A. DROZD 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28