Look v. United States

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: July 22, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-01741
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CATHERINE LOOK, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-01741-CSK 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD 13 v. LITEM 14 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (ECF No. 4) et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Catherine Look, individually and as surviving 18 spouse of Decedent, Jeremy Look, and Lily Morgan’s motion for appointment of Connie 19 Rieken as guardian ad litem for Plaintiffs A.L. and L.L.1 Pls. Mot. (ECF No. 4). No 20 opposition has been filed to the motion. For the reasons that follow, the Court denies 21 Plaintiffs’ motion without prejudice. 22 Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 17, a representative of a minor or 23 incompetent person may sue or defend on the minor or incompetent person's behalf. 24 Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c). “District courts have a special duty, derived from Federal Rule of 25 Civil Procedure 17(c), to safeguard the interests of litigants who are minors.” Robidoux v. 26 Rosengren, 638 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir. 2011). In addition, a court “must appoint a 27 1 This matter proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to the direct assignment under 28 Appendix A(m) of the Local Rules. 1 guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or 2 incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2). 3 The appointment of a guardian ad litem is more than a mere formality. United 4 States v. 30.64 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in Klickitat Cnty., State of Wash., 5 795 F.2d 796, 805 (9th Cir. 1986). “Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c) requires a court to take 6 whatever measures it deems proper to protect an incompetent person during litigation.” 7 Id. 8 The guardian need not possess special qualifications, but he must “be truly 9 dedicated to the best interests of the person on whose behalf he seeks to litigate.” AT&T 10 Mobility, LLC v. Yeager, 143 F. Supp. 3d 1042, 1054 (E.D. Cal. 2015) (quoting Whitmore 11 v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149, 150 (1990)). In the Eastern District of California, Local Rule 12 202(a) further provides, in relevant part: 13 Upon commencement of an action or upon initial appearance in defense of an action by or on behalf of a minor or 14 incompetent person, the attorney representing the minor or incompetent person shall present (1) appropriate evidence of 15 the appointment of a representative for the minor or incompetent person under state law or (2) a motion for the 16 appointment of a guardian ad litem by the Court, or, (3) a showing satisfactory to the Court that no such appointment is 17 necessary to ensure adequate representation of the minor or incompetent person. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c). 18 19 E.D. Local Rule 202(a). Local Rule 202(c) also requires disclosure of the attorney’s 20 interest, providing the following: 21 When the minor or incompetent is represented by an attorney, it shall be disclosed to the Court by whom and the 22 terms under which the attorney was employed; whether the attorney became involved in the application at the instance of 23 the party against whom the causes of action are asserted, directly or indirectly; whether the attorney stands in any 24 relationship to that party; and whether the attorney has received or expects to receive any compensation, from 25 whom, and the amount. 26 Here, the motion does not provide the disclosure of Plaintiffs’ counsel as required 27 by Local Rule 202(c). See Pls. Mot. In addition, the motion appears to be brought under 28 the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Id. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs’ 1 | motion for appointment as guardian ad litem without prejudice to Plaintiffs’ re-filing of a 2 | revised motion that complies with the requirements of Local Rule 202(c) and Federal 3 | Rules of Civil Procedure 17. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 Dated: July 22, 2025 C iy s □□ 8 GHI 500 KIM UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 4, look1741.25 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28