Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-03548/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-03548-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Civil Rights

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IGOR CHEPEL; ROOF VERA CHEPEL, 

as guardian ad litem for minors, ERICK 

CHEPEL, JASON CHEPEL, and 

ASHLEY CHEPEL,

Plaintiffs, No. 2:09-cv-03548 JAM KJN PS

v.

THE LAW OFFICE OF FREDERICK

S. COHEN; FREDERICK S. COHEN, 

individually; MARY ROSS; 

DR. LARRY NICHOLAS; and DOES 1

through 20,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

 /

In an order filed March 12, 2010, the court determined that plaintiff Roof Vera

Chepel could not represent the three minor plaintiffs in this action as a guardian ad litem because

“a parent or guardian cannot bring an action on behalf of a minor child without retaining a

lawyer.” Johns v. County of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997); accord Lin v.

Ashcroft, 377 F.3d 1014, 1025 (9th Cir. 2004). (Dkt. No. 4.) Thus, the court granted plaintiffs

30 days from the date of that order to retain legal representation for the minor plaintiffs, Erick

Chepel, Jason Chepel, and Ashley Chepel. The court cautioned plaintiffs that failure to retain a

Case 2:09-cv-03548-JAM -KJN Document 5 Filed 04/19/10 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

2

licensed attorney to represent the minor plaintiffs would result in a recommendation that the

minor plaintiffs and plaintiff Roof Vera Chepel, as guardian ad litem, be dismissed from the

action without prejudice.

The court’s docket reflects that no licensed attorney has entered an appearance on

behalf of minor plaintiffs Erick Chepel, Jason Chepel, and Ashley Chepel in this action. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. Minor plaintiffs Erick Chepel, Jason Chepel, and Ashley Chepel be

dismissed from this action without prejudice; and 

2. Plaintiff Roof Vera Chepel, as guardian ad litem for the three minor

plaintiffs, be dismissed from this action without prejudice. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir.

1991). 

DATED: April 19, 2010

_____________________________________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:09-cv-03548-JAM -KJN Document 5 Filed 04/19/10 Page 2 of 2