Golden GateReg.Center v. Sup. Ct.
Petitioner (GGRC) petitions this court for a writ of prohibition and/or mandate prohibiting the San Mateo County Superior Court, Juvenile Division from compelling GGRCs participation as a party in the underlying juvenile delinquency proceedings pertaining to real party Marissa D. On March 2, 2007 we requested opposition from the real party in interest and notified the parties that the court may choose to act by issuing a peremptory writ in the first instance. (See Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 177-180.) Both real party and county counsel indicated that neither would be filing an opposition to the petition; accordingly, we now direct the issuance of a peremptory writ.
Finally, we note the odd formulation of the courts order joining GGRC, but excusing its appearance if it provides certain information to the real party. At the hearing the court acknowledged that in this situation its powers were very limited. It indicated that in order to effect a change in GGRCs decision to deny services, real party would have to follow a civil remedy. All the court can do in this situation with a joinder is order that the paper trail be provided you so you can pursue that.As stated in the two joinder statutes discussed above, their purpose is to facilitate coordination and cooperation among the agencies/private service providers which are subject to each of the statutes; they are not intended to facilitate the discovery of an institutions internal documents by someone who has been denied services. Joining GGRC in this litigation is improper under the facts presented and clearly unauthorized.
Comments on Golden GateReg.Center v. Sup. Ct.