Holgerson v. L&L Trucking ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CANDACE HOLGERSON, et al., No. 2:22-cv-01934 DAD AC 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER 14 L&L TRUCKING, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Before the court are two ex parte Motions for the Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem 18 (ECF Nos. 4 and 5), which were referred to the undersigned by District Judge Dale A. Drozd 19 (ECF No. 6). 20 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c)(2), “[a] minor or an incompetent person who 21 does not have a duly appointed representative may sue by a next friend or by a guardian ad 22 litem.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2). Local Rule 202 provides the following additional requirements: 23 (a) Upon commencement of an action or upon initial appearance in defense of an action by or on behalf of a minor or incompetent 24 person, the attorney representing the minor or incompetent person shall present (1) appropriate evidence of the appointment of a 25 representative for the minor or incompetent person under state law or (2) a motion for the appointment of a guardian ad litem by the 26 Court, or, (3) a showing satisfactory to the Court that no such appointment is necessary to ensure adequate representation of the 27 minor or incompetent person. 28 ... ] (c) Disclosure of Attorney’s Interest. When the minor or incompetent is represented by an attorney, it shall be disclosed to the Court by 2 whom and the terms under which the attorney was employed; whether the attorney became involved in the application at the 3 instance of the party against whom the causes of action are asserted, directly or indirectly; whether the attorney stands in any relationship 4 to that party; and whether the attorney has received or expects to receive any compensation, from whom, and the amount. 5 6 | E.D. Cal. L.R. 202. 7 The Ninth Circuit has held that “[a]lthough the [district] court has broad discretion and g || need not appoint a guardian ad litem if it determines the person is or can be otherwise adequately 9 || protected, it is under a legal obligation to consider whether the person is adequately protected.” 10 || United States v. 30.64 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in Klickitat County, State of Wash., 11 | 795 F.2d 796, 805 (9th Cir.1986). Fit parents are presumed to act in the best interests of their 12 | children. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 66 (2000); Doe v. Heck, 327 F.3d 492, 521 (7th Cir. 13 || 2003). 14 Here, plaintiffs ask that Candace Holgerson be appointed guardian ad litem for her minor 15 || children, plaintiff P.H. and B.H., as they act as successors in interest to their father Shayne 16 || Sutherland, who is deceased. ECF Nos. 4 and 5. Plaintiffs provided a declaration regarding P.H 17 || and B.H.’s status as minors, and Ms. Holgerson’s parental relationship to them. Id. at 3-7. 18 || However, Ms. Holgerson and the minor plaintiffs will be represented by counsel, and they have 19 || failed to provide the necessary information regarding the attorney’s interest pursuant to Local 20 || Rule 202(c). 21 Plaintiffs’ counsel shall file a supplemental affidavit within 14 days of this order 22 || providing the necessary information outlined in Local Rule 202(c). A single affidavit directed at 23 || both motions ts sufficient. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: D ber 2, 2022 tht / [U, 4 25 ecember 26 ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28