Roe v. Grossmont Union High School District

Opinion

ROE, a minor, by and through her Case No.: 19-CV-1966-CAB-BGS Guardian ad Litem, JUSTIN SLAGLE, ORDER REGARDING PETITION Plaintiff, v. GUARDIAN AD LITEM

GROSSMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT et al., [Doc. No. 3.] Defendants. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Roe’s Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem. [Doc. No. 3.] The Petition states that Justin Slagle is the father of Minor Plaintiff Roe with legal and physical custody, and requests the Court appoint Justin Slagle as guardian ad litem. [Doc. No. 3 at ¶¶ 2-3.] It is unclear why it is necessary to separately appoint Mr. Slagle as guardian ad litem in this lawsuit, when it appears that he is a general guardian who can sue on his child’s behalf. See Doe ex rel. Sisco v. Weed Union Elementary Sch. Dist., No. 2:13- CV-01145-GEB, 2013 WL 2666024, at *1 (E.D. Cal. June 12, 2013) (holding that parents’ application for appointment as guardian ad litem was unnecessary, noting that “Rule 17(c)(1)(A) permits a ‘general guardian’ to sue in federal court on behalf of a minor, and ‘[a] parent is a guardian who may so sue.’”); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c). Accordingly, the Petition to appoint Justin Slagle as the guardian ad litem for Plaintiff Roe is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Petitioner may re-file the petition with citation to legal authority and explanation as to why the appointment of a guardian ad litem is necessary in this case. Dated: October 11, 2019 € Z Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo United States District Judge