Unpublished Disposition, 930 F.2d 920 (9th Cir. 1991)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Harry Seagrave, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims for damages against the County of Lake, a political subdivision of California, and various county officials for alleged mismanagement of the county department of social services in connection with certain minor children.

Seagrave filed three actions in the district court alleging that the county director of social services had failed to investigate Seagrave's complaints about the housekeeping of the mother of the children, and that the county clerk and a deputy clerk had violated his fourteenth amendment due process rights by denying Seagrave access to the court and by terminating his alleged parental rights without due process of law.

The district court dismissed the damage claims against the county director on the basis of immunity, and dismissed the claims against the director for injunctive relief on the ground that the director had retired and was no longer subject to affirmative injunctive jurisdiction. The court dismissed a complaint Seagrave filed on behalf of his eleven year old son on the ground, among, others, that the putative child plaintiff had alleged no deprivation of his constitutional rights.

The district court correctly dismissed Seagrave's consolidated actions. The dismissal of the claim filed in the name of Christian Seagrave, the child plaintiff, was necessary because the child stated no claim on which relief could be granted. Moreover, Seagrave had not been appointed guardian ad litem for Christian, and had no authority to file a third party claim, or for that matter to undertake litigation on behalf of anyone but himself. Seagrave's claims against Dan Tryk, the social service director, were barred by absolute immunity. Coverdell v. Department of Social and Health Services, 834 F.2d 758 (9th Cir. 1987); Meyers v. Contra Costa County Department of Social Services, 812 F.2d 1154 (9th Cir. 1987). The claims against the clerk and deputy clerk appear to have been dismissed together with the attempted filing on behalf of Christian Seagrave, and in any event stated no claim upon which relief could be granted.

We do not reach questions tendered by the appellant on his attempted appeal from certain post-judgment orders because there was no timely appeal from those orders.

Defendant Tryk's motion for attorney fees is well taken. This defendant was dragged into federal court and required to defend himself against claims that were wholly without merit in fact and unsupported in law. To the extent that his fees were not included in the county's defense, he is entitled to present for filing a proposed judgment for fees actually incurred. As a prisoner, Seagrave may have insufficient assets to pay attorney fees, but that fact should not be allowed to encourage prisoners to file frivolous claims.

AFFIRMED.