Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00064/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00064-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

D.D. initiated this action by filing a complaint on January 13, 2020 and petitioning the Court to 

appoint Tom Durbin as his guardian ad litem in this action. (Doc. 2.) 

Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[a] minor . . . who does not have a duly 

appointed representative may sue by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2). 

In addition, a 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.” Id. The capacity of an individual to 

sue is determined “by the law of the individual’s domicile.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(b). Here, Plaintiff 

resides in Ridgecrest, California (Doc. 2 at 2), and the law of the state governs. Under California law, 

an individual under the age of eighteen is a minor, and a minor may bring suit as long as a guardian 

conducts the proceedings. Cal. Fam. Code §§ 6502, 6601. A guardian ad litem may be appointed to 

represent the minor’s interests. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 372(a). 

In determining whether to appoint a particular guardian ad litem, the court must consider 

D. D.,

 Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF KERN, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:20-cv-00064-DAD-JLT

ORDER GRANTING PETITION TO APPOINT 

TOM DURBIN AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR 

THE MINOR PLAINTIFF

(Doc. 2)

Case 1:20-cv-00064-DAD-JLT Document 8 Filed 02/11/20 Page 1 of 2
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

whether the minor and the prospective guardian have divergent interests. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 

372(b)(1). “When 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.” Williams v. Super. Ct., 147 Cal.App.4th 36, 38 (Cal. Ct. App. 4th 2007) (internal quotation 

marks and citation omitted). The decision to appoint a guardian ad litem is “normally left to the sound 

discretion of the trial court.” United States v. 30.64 Acres of Land, etc., 795 F.2d 796, 804 (9th Cir. 

1986). 

Tom Durbin is the father of D.D., who is currently 17 years old. (Doc. 2 at 2.) Because 

Plaintiff is under the age of eighteen, he is a minor under California law. See Cal. Fam. Code § 6502. 

Consequently, his ability to bring suit is contingent upon the Court’s appointment of a guardian ad 

litem. Upon review of the complaint, it does not appear Mr. Durbin has any interests that are adverse 

to the child’s. Accordingly, Mr. Durbin’s appointment as guardian ad litem for his son is appropriate. 

Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS: 

1. The petition for appointment of Tom Durbin as guardian ad litem for Plaintiff D.D. (Doc. 

2) is GRANTED; and 

2. Tom Durbin is appointed to act as guardian ad litem for D.D. in this action and is 

authorized to prosecute it on his behalf.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 11, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00064-DAD-JLT Document 8 Filed 02/11/20 Page 2 of 2