Dunn

Dunn v. HUD Urban Development

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 7, 20251:24-cv-00815California483 words

Opinion

trial_court 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…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.