Munoz v. United States

Opinion

BRYAN MUNOZ, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01371-KES-BAM Plaintiffs, ORDER VACATING APRIL 18, 2025 HEARING v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPOINT GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR PLAINTIFFS BRYAN MUNOZ, JERRY Defendant. MUNOZ-MOLINA, AND ANGELENE MUNOZ-MOLINA (Doc. 14) Currently before the Court is the motion of Plaintiff Maritsa Molina to be appointed as guardian ad litem for minor plaintiffs Bryan Munoz, Jerry Munoz-Molina, and Angelene Munoz- Molina. (Doc. 14.) Defendant United States of America did not file any opposition within the time prescribed by Local Rule 230(c). The matter was referred to the undersigned pursuant to the Standing Order issued on November 8, 2024. (Doc. 4-1.) The Court finds the motion appropriate for resolution without oral argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(g), and the hearing on the motion is HEREBY VACATED. The claims in this action arise from the following common allegations: On June 21, 2023, Plaintiffs Bryan Munoz, Maritsa Molina, Jerry Munoz-Molina, Gerardo Munoz, and Angelene Munoz-Molina were at the Tule Recreation Area at Lake Success near the City of Porterville in Tulare County, California. Plaintiff Bryan Munoz came upon what appeared to be a dirt hill or a large mound of dirt. However, what appeared to be a dirt hill was really a large pile of hot ashes. As Plaintiff Bryan Munoz approached the unrestricted pile of hot ashes, he fell onto the ashes causing burns to his lower extremities. Plaintiff Bryan Munoz’s family, Plaintiffs Maritsa Molina, Jerry Munoz-Molina, Gerardo Munoz, and Angelene Munoz-Molina allegedly sustained emotional distress as a result of the incident. (See generally Complaint, Doc. 1.) According to the moving papers, on April 2, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a complaint against the State of California, County of Tulare, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Department of Agriculture – Forest Service in Tulare County Superior Court. (Doc. 14 at 3; Declaration of Mary L. Caruso (“Caruso Decl.”) ¶ 3.) The federal defendants—U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Department of Agriculture – Forest Service—removed the action to this court. (Caruso Decl. ¶ 4.) Following removal, the State of California reportedly advised Plaintiffs that it could not be sued in federal court pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment. (Id. ¶ 5.) As a result, on June 4, 2024, the parties stipulated to dismissal of the federal defendants, and the case was remanded to state court. (Id. ¶ 6.) On November 7, 2024, Plaintiffs commenced this parallel action under the Federal Tort Claims Act against the United States of America. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff Maritsa Molina now seeks to be appointed as guardian ad litem for her children, minor plaintiffs Bryan Munoz (born in 2012, age 13), Jerry Munoz-Molina (born in 2017, age 8), and Angelene Munoz-Molina (born in 2018, age 7). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17 provides that “[t]he court must appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2). This requires a district court to take whatever measures it deems proper to protect the individual during litigation. United States v. 30.64 Acres of Land, 795 F.2d 796, 805 (9th Cir. 1986). Local Rule 202(a) of this Court further states:

Upon commencement of an action or 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 shall present (1) appropriate evidence of the appointment of a representative for a minor or incompetent person under state law or (2) a motion for the appointment 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 incompetent person. See L.R. 202(a). The decision to appoint a guardian ad litem “must normally be left to the sound discretion of the trial court.” 30.64 Acres, 795 F.2d at 804. “[W]hen a parent brings an action on behalf of a child, and it is evident that the interests of each are the same, no need exists for someone other than the parent to represent the child’s interests under Rule 17(c).” H.D.A. v. County of Stanislaus, No. 1:22-cv-00384-DAD-SAB, 2022 WL 992990, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 1, 2022) (quoting Gonzalez v. Reno, 86 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1185 (S.D. Fla.), aff'd, 212 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2000)). “While a parent is generally appointed as a guardian ad litem, there are situations where the best interests of the minor and the interests of the parent conflict.” Id. (citing Anthem Life Ins. Co. v. Olguin, No. 1:06-cv-01165 AWI NEW (TAG), 2007 WL 1390672, at *2 (E.D. Cal. May 9, 2007)). Therefore, a parent is not entitled as a matter of right to act as guardian ad litem for the child. Id. The Court has considered the motion of Plaintiff Maritsa Molina to be appointed as guardian ad litem for her children, minor plaintiffs Bryan Munoz, Jerry Munoz-Molina, and Angelene Munoz-Molina, and finds no conflict that would preclude her from serving as guardian ad litem. As acknowledged by the moving papers, Plaintiff Maritsa Molina may have a potential conflict of interest with her children because she is also a party to this action. (Doc. 14 at 6.) However, her claims are the same as those of her children, including the claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. According to her counsel, “she is fully committed to prioritizing and acting in the best interests of her children throughout the case.” (Doc. 14 at 6; see also Caruso Decl. ¶ 10.) She also will act on their behalf in this action, “ensuring that their legal rights and interests are fully protected.” (Doc. 14 at 4; see also Caruso Decl. ¶ 10.) Moreover, she has been appointed as the guardian ad litem for the minor plaintiffs in the parallel state court action arising from the same incident. (See Ex. 1 to Caruso Decl.) Given her appointment in the state court action, evidencing her consent to serve as guardian ad litem for her children, the Court will grant the motion. Based on the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Maritsa Molina is appointed in this action as guardian ad litem for minor plaintiffs Bryan Munoz, Jerry Munoz-Molina, and Angelene Munoz-Molina. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 2, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE