A. v. City of Sunnyvale

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: January 6, 2025
• Docket: 5:24-cv-09312
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 A. A., Case No. 24-cv-09312-VKD

9 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION 10 v. TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD LITEM

11 CITY OF SUNNYVALE, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 2 Defendants. 12

13 14 Plaintiff A.A., a minor, sues the City of Sunnyvale and several of its officers for alleged 15 excessive force in violation of his civil rights under federal and state law. See Dkt. No. 3. A.A.’s 16 mother, Maria Lopez, moves for an order appointing her as A.A.’s guardian ad litem. Dkt. No. 2. 17 Rule 17 provides that “[a] minor or an incompetent person who does not have a duly appointed 18 representative may sue by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2). “The 19 court must appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or 20 incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action.” Id. An individual’s capacity to sue is 21 determined by the law of the individual’s domicile. Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(b). In California, an individual 22 under the age of 18 is a minor. Cal. Fam. Code § 6500. A minor may bring suit as long as a guardian 23 conducts the proceedings, and the Court may appoint a guardian ad litem to represent a minor’s 24 interests in the litigation. Cal. Fam. Code § 6601; Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 372(a); Williams v. Super. 25 Ct., 147 Cal. App. 4th 36, 46-47 (2007). 26 “A court has broad discretion in ruling on a guardian ad litem application.” Williams, 147 Cal. 27 App. 4th at 47. In determining whether to appoint a guardian ad litem, the Court must consider 1 “When there is a potential conflict between a perceived parental responsibility and an obligation to 2 assist the court in achieving a just and speedy determination of the action, a court has the right to select 3 a guardian ad litem who is not a parent if that guardian would best protect the child’s interests.” 4 Williams, 147 Cal. App. 4th at 49 (internal quotations and citation omitted). “[I]f the parent has an 5 actual or potential conflict of interest with his child, the parent has no right to control or influence the 6 child’s litigation.” /d. at 50. “In the absence of a conflict of interest, the appointment is usually made 7 on application only and involves little exercise of discretion.” /d. at 47 (cleaned up; citation omitted); 8 see also Student A v. Berkeley Unified Sch. Dist., No. 17-cv-02510-MEJ, 2017 WL 2171254, at *1 9 (N.D. Cal. May 17, 2017) (“When there is no conflict of interest, the guardian ad litem appointment is 10 usually made on ex parte application and involves minimal exercise of discretion by the trial □□□□□□□□□ 11 (internal quotations and citation omitted)). Additionally, when “‘a parent brings an action on behalf of 12 a child, and it is evident that the interests of each are the same, no need exists for someone other than 13 the parent to represent the child’s interests under Rule 17(c).’” J.M. v. Liberty Union High Sch. Dist., 14 No. 16-cv-05225-LB, 2016 WL 4942999, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 16, 2016) (quoting Gonzalez v. Reno, 3 15 86 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1185 (S.D. Fla. 2000), aff'd 212 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2000)). 16 Here, the record presented indicates that Ms. Lopez, as A.A.’s mother, is competent and 3 17 willing to serve as A.A.’s guardian ad litem. Dkt. No. 2-2. As nothing in the record indicates a 18 conflict of interest between Ms. Lopez and A.A., or any other reason why the present application 19 should not be granted, the Court grants the motion and appoints Ms. Lopez as guardian ad litem for 20 || A.A. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: January 6, 2025 23 «eo 24 VuraivinE, QuMarcbe Virginia K. DeMarchi 25 United States Magistrate Judge 26 27 28