Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00062/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00062-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 42:405 Fair Housing Act

---

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

11cv62

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMAS ANGSTMAN; TRACEY

ANGSTMAN; S.A., a minor, by and

through his GUARDIAN AD LITEM

KRISTINE ANGSTMAN; S.A., a minor,

by and through her GUARDIAN AD

LITEM KRISTINE ANGSTMAN

Plaintiffs,

v.

CARLSBAD SEAPOINT RESORT II,

L.P., et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 11cv62 L(WMc)

ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE

MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF

GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR S.A.

AND S.A. [doc. #5]

Petitioner Kristine Angstman moves to be appointed as guardian ad litem to represent the

interests of the two minor plaintiffs in this action. Kristine Angstman is the paternal aunt of the

minor plaintiffs. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c)(2) provides that a minor may sue through a

guardian ad litem or by next friend, but a court must formally appoint the guardian ad litem to

protect the unrepresented minor. See Watson v. County of Santa Clara, 468 F. Supp.2d 1150,

1155 (N.D. Cal.2007). In determining “what factors or procedures to use when appointing the

guardian ad litem” or next friend, a court focuses on “the protection of the [minor's] interests.”

Gibbs v. Carnival Cruise Lines, 314 F.3d 125, 135-36 (3d Cir.2002).

Case 3:11-cv-00062-L-WMC Document 6 Filed 01/24/11 Page 1 of 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

2 11cv62

The proposed guardian ad litem, Kristine Angstman, is not a party to this action.

Although not specifically stated in the ex parte motion and declaration, it does not appear that

she has a personal financial interest in the outcome of the litigation or any interests adverse to

the minor plaintiffs or any other reason why she might not protect their interests. Kristine

Angstman has made an adequate showing that she will act in good faith to protect the minor

plaintiffs’ interests and therefore, she will be appointed guardian ad litem for both minor

children. 

After a court appoints a guardian ad litem to represent a minor child, the guardian ad

litem must retain a lawyer, because the non-lawyer guardian may not appear as an attorney for

anyone other than himself. See Johns v. County of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir.1997).

The Law Offices of Craig P. Fagan has been engaged to represent the plaintiffs, including the

minor plaintiffs, in this action. 

Based on the foregoing, Kristine Angstman’s ex parte motion for appointment of guardian

ad litem for minor plaintiffs S.A. and S.A. is GRANTED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: January 24, 2011

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

COPY TO: 

HON. WILLIAM McCURINE, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALL PARTIES/COUNSEL

Case 3:11-cv-00062-L-WMC Document 6 Filed 01/24/11 Page 2 of 2