Reyes v. County of Kern ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANNA REYES, et al. Case No. 1:21-cv-01340-CDB 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR 13 v. L.H.B. AND P.H.B. 14 COUNTY OF KERN, (Docs. 28, 29) 15 Defendant. 16 17 On September 7, 2021, Defendant County of Kern removed this action filed by Plaintiffs in 18 Kern County Superior Court. (Doc. 1). Plaintiffs filed motions to appoint guardian ad litem for 19 L.H.B. and P.H.B. on February 2, 2023. (Docs. 22-23). The Court denied Plaintiffs’ motions to 20 appoint guardian ad litem for L.H.B. and P.H.B. without prejudice as the motions did not comply 21 with Local Rule 202 and the motions and supporting declarations did not establish that proposed 22 guardian had no interests adverse to the minors she sought to represent. (Doc. 26). 23 Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs renewed motions to appoint guardian ad litem for 24 L.H.B. and P.H.B. (Docs. 28-29). 25 LEGAL STANDARD 26 Pursuant to Rule 17 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a representative of a minor or 27 incompetent person may sue or defend on the minor or incompetent person’s behalf. Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c). In addition, a court “must appoint a guardian ad litem - or issue another appropriate 1 order - to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action.” Id. The 2 capacity of an individual to sue is determined “by the law of the individual’s domicile.” Fed. R. 3 Civ. P. 17(b)(1). 4 Under California law, an individual under the age of 18 is a minor, and a minor may bring 5 suit if a guardian conducts the proceedings. Cal. Fam. Code §§ 6502, 6601. The Court may appoint 6 a guardian ad litem to represent the minor’s interests. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 372(a). To evaluate 7 whether to appoint a particular guardian ad litem, the Court must consider whether the minor and 8 the guardian have divergent interests. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 372(b)(1). 9 The appointment of the guardian ad litem is more than a mere formality. United States v. 10 30.64 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in Klickitat Cty., State of Wash., 795 F.2d 796, 805 11 (9th Cir. 1986). A Court shall take whatever measures it deems appropriate to protect the interests 12 of the induvial during the litigation. See id. (noting, “[a] guardian ad litem is authorized to act on 13 behalf of his ward and may make all appropriate decisions in the course of specific litigation.”). 14 The guardian need not possess any special qualifications, but he must “be truly dedicated to the 15 best interests of the person on whose behalf he seeks to litigate.” AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Yeager, 16 143 F. Supp.3d 1042, 1054 (E.D. Cal. 2015) (quoting Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149, 163-64 17 (1990)). This means that the guardian cannot face an impermissible conflict of interest with the 18 ward, and courts consider the candidate’s “experience, objectivity and expertise” or previous 19 relationship with the ward. Id. (citations omitted). 20 Further, the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California provide: 21 (a) Appointment of Representative or Guardian. Upon commencement of an action or 22 upon initial appearance in defense of an action by or on behalf of a minor or incompetent person, the attorney representing the minor or incompetent person 23 shall present (1) appropriate evidence of the appointment of a representative for the minor or incompetent person under state law or (2) a motion for the appointment 24 of a guardian ad litem by the Court, or (3) a showing satisfactory to the Court that no such appointment is necessary to ensure adequate representation of the minor or 25 incompetent person. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c); 26 . . . . 27 (c) Disclosure of Attorney’s Interest. When the minor or incompetent is represented by 1 the attorney was employed; whether the attorney became involved in the 2 application at the instance of the party against whom the causes of action are asserted, directly or indirectly; whether the attorney stands in any relationship to 3 that party; and whether the attorney has received or expects to receive any 4 c ompensation, from whom, and the amount. (E.D. Cal. Local Rule 202). 5 The decision to appoint a guardian ad litem “must normally be left to the sound discretion 6 of the trial court.” 30.64 Acres of Land, 795 F.2d at 804. Fit parents are presumed to act in the 7 best interests of their children. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 66 (2000). However, “if the parent 8 has an actual or potential conflict of interest with [their] child, the parent has no right to control or 9 influence the child’s litigation.” Molesky for J.M. v. Carillo, No. 1:22-cv-1567-ADA-CDB, 2022 10 WL 17584396, *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 12, 2022) (quoting Williams v. Super. Ct. of San Diego, 147 Cal. 11 App.4th 36, 50 (2007)). 12 DISCUSSION 13 Plaintiffs’ motions were filed on February 13, 2023, and state that Plaintiffs L.H.B. and 14 P.H.B. are five and four years old, respectively. (Docs. 28, 29). The proposed guardian ad litem, 15 Christina Hungerford, declares she is competent, responsible, able and willing to serve as the 16 guardian ad litem, and possess no adverse interests to L.H.B. and P.H.B. (Docs. 28-1, 29-1). As 17 L.H.B. and P.H.B.’s parent, Christina Hungerford is qualified to understand and protect the minors’ 18 rights and attests she can “appropriately serve and protect [their] best interests in this action.” Id. 19 Separately, the motions meet E.D. Cal. Local Rule 202(c)’s in disclosing the attorneys for 20 Plaintiffs’ interest. (Docs. 28, 29). 21 CONCLUSION AND ORDER 22 For the foregoing reasons, it is HEREBY ORDERED: 23 1. Plaintiffs’ motions to appoint Christina Hungerford as guardian ad litem for 24 L.H.B. and P.H.B. (Docs. 28, 29) are GRANTED; and 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / / / / 1 2. Christina Hungerford is appointed to act as guardian ad litem for Plaintiffs L.H.B. 2 and P.H.B and is authorized to prosecute the claims on their behalf. 3 | IT IS SO ORDERED. “| Dated: _ February 14, 2023 | hr 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Document Info

Docket Number: 1:21-cv-01340

Filed Date: 2/14/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/20/2024