Jane Doe, an infant, by her next friend, Angela Murphy v. Crandall
7:17-cv-00370
| W.D. Va. | Oct 23, 2017Background
- Angela Murphy, proceeding pro se, sued on behalf of her minor daughter (Jane Doe) asserting state-law tort claims in federal court under diversity jurisdiction.
- Defendant Daniel Crandall moved to dismiss, arguing Virginia law requires suits by a minor through a next friend be captioned in the minor’s name and that the Complaint’s caption was improper and incurable.
- Murphy moved for leave to amend; defendant also moved to strike Exhibits B and C to the Complaint as not referenced.
- Doe’s domicile is Massachusetts; Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Massachusetts rules govern capacity and real-party-in-interest issues in diversity cases.
- The court considered whether federal procedural rules allow substitution/ratification instead of dismissal, and whether exhibits should be stricken or sealed.
- The court raised sua sponte that a non‑lawyer parent cannot represent a minor in federal court (Myers), and stayed the case 60 days for counsel to appear.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caption/standing for suit by minor | Murphy sought leave to amend and substitute Doe as plaintiff | Caption was improper under Virginia law; complaint should be dismissed and cannot be cured by amendment | Court applied federal law; denied dismissal, granted leave to amend, ordered substitution of Jane Doe as plaintiff |
| Choice of law for capacity/real‑party issues | Doe domiciled in MA; federal/Mass. rules permit next‑friend actions and allow ratification/substitution | Relied on Virginia decisions requiring suit to be in minor's name and precluding cure | Federal Rule 17 and Mass. Rule 17 govern; court allowed ratification/substitution under Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a)(3) and Mass. R. Civ. P. 17(a) |
| Motion to strike Exhibits B & C | Exhibits are relevant to claims | Defendant argued exhibits not expressly referenced in complaint and moved to strike under Rule 12(f) | Denied motion to strike; exhibits are relevant but ordered placed under seal |
| Pro se representation of minor’s claims | Murphy requested time to secure counsel and leave to proceed | Defendant did not raise but court must ensure proper representation | Under Myers, non‑attorney parent cannot litigate minor’s claims; court stayed case 60 days for counsel to appear |
Key Cases Cited
- Herndon v. St. Mary's Hosp., Inc., 587 S.E.2d 567 (Va. 2003) (Virginia precedent on suits by next friend and captioning requirements)
- Erie R.R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938) (federal courts in diversity apply state substantive law and federal procedural law)
- Myers v. Loudoun Cty. Pub. Sch., 418 F.3d 395 (4th Cir. 2005) (non‑attorney parents generally may not litigate minor children’s federal claims)
- Kirby v. Gillam, 28 S.E.2d 40 (Va. 1943) (older Virginia authority on captioning and cure of defects)