Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01621/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01621-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

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

On October 23, 2015, Chad Paregien initiated this action on behalf of minor Plaintiff P.S.P and 

Sandra Dudley initiated this action on behalf of S.J.P., and both requested to be appointed as the 

guardians ad litem for the child. (Docs. 1-3, 1-4) 

I. Appointment of a Guardian Ad Litem

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, P.S.P and J.S.P reside in California (Doc. 1 at 2) and the law of the state governs. Under 

California law, an indi fvidual 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 

SHAWN J. PAREGIEN, et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

WILSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01621 - --- - JLT 

ORDER GRANTING THE MOTION TO APPOINT 

CHAD PAREGIEN AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM 

FOR P.S.P. AND SANDRA DUDLEY AS LITEM 

FOR MINOR PLAINTIFF S.J.P AND 

(Docs. 1-3, 1-4)

Case 1:15-cv-01621-AWI-JLT Document 7 Filed 11/25/15 Page 1 of 3
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

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

II. Discussion and Analysis

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

whether the minor and the 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). “[I]f the parent has an actual or potential conflict of interest with his child, the parent has no 

right to control or influence the child's litigation.” Id. at 50.

Here, Plaintiff P.S.P. is a five-year-old (Doc. 1-3 at 1) and S.J.P. is 16 years old. (Doc. 1-4 at 1) 

Both are minors under California law. See Cal. Fam. Code § 6502. As minors, their ability to bring 

suit is contingent upon the appointment of a guardian ad litem for each. Upon review of the complaint, 

it does not appear there are adverse interests between the children and their proposed guardians ad 

litem. Neither proposed guardian appears to have a competing claims with the children, given they are 

the only plaintiffs in this action, and the only claims are asserted on their behalf. Accordingly, 

appointment of Mr. Paregien and M., Dudley as guardians ad litem for the children is appropriate. See 

Burke v. Smith, 252 F.3d 1260, 1264 (11th Cir. 2001) (“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.”); see also Anthem Life Ins. Co. v. Olguin, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37669, at *7 

(E.D. Cal. May 9, 2007) (observing that “[a] parent is generally appointed guardian ad litem”).

III. Conclusion and Order

The decision whether 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). Here, it 

does not appear either proposed guardian has conflicting interests, and as such they may be appointed 

to represent the interests of the children. Therefore, the Court is acting within its discretion to grant 

the application.

///

Case 1:15-cv-01621-AWI-JLT Document 7 Filed 11/25/15 Page 2 of 3
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

Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. The motion for appointment of Chad Paregien as guardian ad litem for P.S.P. (Doc. 1-

3) is GRANTED; 

2. The motion for appointment of Sandra Dudley as guardian ad litem for S.J.P. (Doc. 1-

4) is GRANTED and 

3. Chad Paregien is appointed to act as guardian ad litem for Plaintiff P.S.P., and is 

authorized to prosecute this action on her behalf;

4. Sandra Dudley is appointed to act as guardian ad litem for Plaintiff S.J.P., and is 

authorized to prosecute this action on his behalf.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 25, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01621-AWI-JLT Document 7 Filed 11/25/15 Page 3 of 3