Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_20-cv-02350/USCOURTS-cand-3_20-cv-02350-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 448
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights - Education
Cause of Action: 20:1401 Education: Handicapped Child Act

---

ORDER – No. 20-cv-02350-LB

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

San Francisco Division 

JOSEPH LAIN, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

PLEASANTON UNIFIED SCHOOL 

DISTRICT, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 20-cv-02350-LB 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 

APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD 

LITEM 

Re: ECF No. 2 

INTRODUCTION 

In this case, Joseph Lain, individually and on behalf of his disabled minor daughter, A.L., sued 

the Pleasanton Unified School District, the Contra Costa County Office of Education, and related 

individual defendants for retaliating against him for exercising his due-process rights to advocate 

for his daughter and for denying A.L. access to education, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Title 

II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and 

California Education Code § 56046.1 Mr. Lain moved ex parte for an order appointing him as 

guardian ad litem for A.L.2 The court grants the motion. 

1

 Compl. – ECF No. 1. 

2

 Pet. for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem – ECF No. 2. 

Case 3:20-cv-02350-LB Document 5 Filed 04/09/20 Page 1 of 3
ORDER – No. 20-cv-02350-LB 2

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

ANALYSIS 

1. Governing Law 

“A minor or an incompetent person who does not have a duly appointed representative may 

sue by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem. The 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). An individual’s capacity to sue is determined by the law of 

the individual’s domicile. Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(b). Under California law, an individual under the age 

of eighteen is a minor. Cal. Fam. Code § 6500. A minor may bring suit as long as a guardian 

conducts the proceedings and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem to protect the minor’s 

interests in the litigation. Cal. Fam. Code § 6601; Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 372(a); Williams v. 

Super. Ct., 147 Cal. App. 4th 36, 46–47 (2007). 

The court “has broad discretion in ruling on a guardian ad litem application.” Williams, 147 

Cal. App. 4th at 47. In the case of parent representatives, “‘[w]hen there is a potential conflict 

between a perceived parental responsibility and an obligation to assist the court in achieving a just 

and speedy determination of the action,’ a court has the right to select a guardian ad litem who is 

not a parent if that guardian would best protect the child’s interests.” Id. at 49 (quoting M.S. v. 

Wermers, 557 F.2d 170, 175 (8th Cir. 1977)). Thus, “if the parent has an actual or potential 

conflict of interest with his [or her] child, the parent has no right to control or influence the child’s 

litigation.” Id. at 50. If, on the other hand, “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).” J.M. v. Liberty Union High Sch. Dist., No. 16-cv05225-LB, 2016 WL 4942999, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 16, 2016) (citing cases). “‘In the absence of 

a conflict of interest, the appointment is usually made on application only and involves little 

exercise of discretion.’” Williams, 147 Cal. App. 4th at 47 (internal ellipsis omitted) (quoting In re 

Marriage of Caballero, 27 Cal. App. 4th 1139, 1149 (1994)). 

Case 3:20-cv-02350-LB Document 5 Filed 04/09/20 Page 2 of 3
ORDER – No. 20-cv-02350-LB 3

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

2. Application 

A.L. is under eighteen years old and therefore is a minor under California law. Her ability to 

sue is contingent on the appointment of a guardian ad litem. A parent may serve as guardian ad 

litem if the parent does not have an adverse interest. 

The plaintiffs ask to appoint A.L.’s father as her guardian ad litem. The court finds no conflicts 

in their claim and grants the motion. See J.M., 2016 WL 4942999, at *2 (“Generally, when a 

minor is represented by a parent who is a party to the lawsuit and who has the same interests as the 

child there is no inherent conflict of interest.”) (quoting Burke v. Smith, 252 F.3d 1260, 1264 (11th 

Cir. 2001)). 

CONCLUSION 

The court grants the motion and appoints Joseph Lain as guardian ad litem for A.L. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 9, 2020 

______________________________________ 

LAUREL BEELER 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:20-cv-02350-LB Document 5 Filed 04/09/20 Page 3 of 3