Edwin Vasquez v. City of Los Angeles

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDWIN VASQUEZ, 2:22-cv-4661-DSF-MRWx Plaintiff, Order to Show Cause re v. Standing

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Defendants.

Defendants have filed a joint motion to reopen discovery based on several issues relating to the death of Edwin Vasquez and the substitution of E.V.T, a minor, as Vasquez’s successor-in-interest. Rather than rule on the motion to reopen discovery at this time, the Court finds that it would be more expeditious to have E.V.T.’s guardian ad litem first provide a clear, direct statement of why E.V.T. succeeded to Vasquez’s claims under California law. Vasquez appears to have died intestate and never to have married E.V.T.’s mother. See Dkt. 214 at 3; Perez Decl. (Dkt. 214-2) ¶ 5. In these circumstances, there are relatively few avenues to establish that Vasquez was E.V.T.’s “natural parent” for the purposes of intestate succession.

1 Plaintiff repeatedly cites the Court’s approval of the substitution of E.V.T. as successor-in-interest. But at the time this substitution was granted, the Court had no reason to believe that there would be any potential dispute as to…