DeLuca v. Kern County Sheriff's Office

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: December 16, 2024
• Docket: 1:24-cv-01524
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3

4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 JENNIFER DELUCA, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01524-JLT-CDB

12 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTIONS TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD LITEM 13 v. (Docs. 3, 4) 14 KERN COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, et al., 14-DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants. 16

17 Background 18 Plaintiffs Jennifer DeLuca and minors M.D. and G.D., by and through their proposed guardian 19 ad litem Anthony DeLuca, the minors’ biological maternal grandfather (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), 20 commenced this civil rights action with the filing of a complaint against Defendants Kern County, 21 Kern County Sheriff’s Office, Kern County Hospital Authority, and Sheriff Donny Youngblood 22 (collectively, “Defendants”) on December 12, 2024. (Doc. 1). 23 Pending before the Court are the motions of minor Plaintiffs M.D. and G.D. to appoint their 24 biological maternal grandfather, Anthony DeLuca, as guardian ad litem, filed December 12, 2024. 25 (Docs. 3, 4). 26 Applicable Legal Standard 27 Pursuant to Rule 17 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a representative of a minor may 28 sue or defend on the minor’s behalf. Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c). A court “must appoint a guardian ad 1 litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is 2 unrepresented in an action.” Id. The capacity of an individual to sue is determined “by the law of the 3 individual’s domicile.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(b)(1). 4 Under California law, an individual under the age of 18 is a minor, and a minor may bring suit 5 if a guardian conducts the proceedings. Cal. Fam. Code §§ 6502, 6601. The Court may appoint a 6 guardian ad litem to represent the minor’s interests. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 372(a). To evaluate whether 7 to appoint a particular guardian ad litem, the Court must consider whether the minor and the guardian 8 have divergent interests. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 372(b)(1); see id. § 372(d)(1)–(2) (“Before a court 9 appoints a guardian ad litem pursuant to this chapter, a proposed guardian ad litem shall disclose both 10 of the following to the court and all parties to the action or proceeding: (1) Any known actual or 11 potential conflicts of interest that would or might arise from the appointment[; and] (2) [a]ny familial 12 or affiliate relationship the proposed guardian ad litem as with any of the parties.”). 13 The appointment of the guardian ad litem is more than a mere formality. United States v. 14 30.64 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in Klickitat Cty., State of Wash., 795 F.2d 796, 805 (9th 15 Cir. 1986). A Court shall take whatever measures it deems appropriate to protect the interests of the 16 individual during the litigation. See id. (noting, “[a] guardian ad litem is authorized to act on behalf of 17 his ward and may make all appropriate decisions in the course of specific litigation.”). The guardian 18 need not possess any special qualifications, but she must “be truly dedicated to the best interests of the 19 person on whose behalf he seeks to litigate.” AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Yeager, 143 F. Supp.3d 1042, 20 1054 (E.D. Cal. 2015) (quoting Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149, 163-64 (1990)). This means that 21 the guardian cannot face an impermissible conflict of interest with the ward, and courts consider the 22 candidate’s “experience, objectivity and expertise” or previous relationship with the ward. Id. 23 (citations omitted). 24 Further, the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California provide: 25 (a) Appointment of Representative or Guardian. Upon commencement of an action or upon initial appearance in defense of an action by or on behalf of a minor or 26 incompetent person, the attorney representing the minor or incompetent person shall present (1) appropriate evidence of the appointment of a representative for the minor 27 or incompetent person under state law or (2) a motion for the appointment of a 28 guardian ad litem by the Court, or (3) a showing satisfactory to the Court that no such 1 appointment is necessary to ensure adequate representation of the minor or incompetent person. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c); 2 . . . . 3 (c) Disclosure of Attorney’s Interest. When the minor or incompetent is represented by an 4 attorney, it shall be disclosed to the Court by whom and the terms under which the 5 attorney was employed; whether the attorney became involved in the application at the instance of the party against whom the causes of action are asserted, 6 directly or indirectly; whether the attorney stands in any relationship to that party; and whether the attorney has received or expects to receive any compensation, from whom, 7 and the amount. (E.D. Cal. Local Rule 202). 8

9 The decision to appoint a guardian ad litem “must normally be left to the sound discretion of 10 the trial court.” 30.64 Acres of Land, 795 F.2d at 804. Fit parents are presumed to act in the best 11 interests of their children. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 66 (2000). However, “if the parent has an 12 actual or potential conflict of interest with [their] child, the parent has no right to control or influence 13 the child’s litigation.” Molesky for J.M. v. Carillo, No. 1:22-cv-1567-ADA-CDB, 2022 WL 14 17584396, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 12, 2022) (quoting Williams v. Super. Ct. of San Diego, 147 Cal. App. 15 4th 36, 50 (2007)). 16 Discussion 17 The supporting declaration of Anthony DeLuca accompanying the motions sets forth that G.D. 18 is 9 years old and M.D. is 14 years old, and that both minors reside with the proposed guardian ad 19 litem, who is their biological grandfather. (Docs. 3, 4 at 3). The proposed guardian ad litem 20 represents that on or about October 22, 2023, the minors’ mother, Plaintiff Jennifer DeLuca, was 21 experiencing a mental health crisis which prompted her family to contact the Kern County Sheriff’s 22 Office for assistance, and on or about October 27, 2023, Jennifer DeLuca attempted suicide by 23 jumping off the second floor of the housing module to which she was booked, resulting in serious and 24 permanent injuries to her person. (Id.). The proposed guardian ad litem further represents that as a 25 result of those injuries, Jennifer DeLuca is now physically and mentally disabled such that she cannot 26 maintain a meaningful or similar relationship that she once had with her children G.D. and M.D. (Id.). 27 The proposed guardian ad litem represents that both G.D. and M.D. have no other appointed 28 representative or guardian, and as minors, can only bring their claims by way of a guardian ad litem. 1 || dd.). A review of the docket confirms that no other motion for appointment of guardian ad litem fe 2 || either G.D. or M.D. has been filed. The proposed guardian ad litem declares that he has no known □ 3 || foreseeable interests adverse to those of G.D. or M.D. (id. at § 6). The proposed guardian ad lite 4 || represent that he could competently testify to the matters concerned and he is qualified to understar 5 || and protect the rights of both G.D. and M.D. in this action. (d. Jj 1, 3). Plaintiffs are suing Kei 6 ||County (Doc. 1) and there does not appear to be any conflict of interest among the claims ar 7 || claimants. 8 Plaintiffs’ motions do not comply with Local Rule 202(c). Neither motion discloses the tern 9 ||under which counsel for Plaintiffs was employed and whether counsel became involved in tl 10 || application at the insistence of any Defendant. (Docs. 3, 4). Moreover, Plaintiffs’ motions do n 11 || demonstrate whether counsel for Plaintiffs stands in any relationship to Defendants or whether couns 12 has received or expects to receive any compensation, from whom, and the amount. See E.D. C: 13 |} Local Rule 202(c). 14 || Conclusion and Order 15 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motions for the appointment | 16 || guardian ad litem (Docs. 3, 4) are DENIED without prejudice. 17 And it is FURTHER ORDERED that, within 14days of the date of entry of this orde 18 || Plaintiffs SHALL FILE renewed applications that remedy the aforementioned deficiencies consiste 19 |} with Local Rule 202(c). 20 IT IS SO ORDERED.

22 || Dated: _December 16, 2024 _ lyr DR UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28