Court Opinion

ID: 9738513
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 19:55:19.979722+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:06.664860
License: Public Domain

Fitzgerald, P.J.
(concurring). I concur with the *557majority’s conclusion that the intent of the Legislature was to exclude guardians ad litem from the scope of governmental immunity. I write separately, however, to express my concern that disgruntled parents who are dissatisfied with a custody decision may retaliate by suing the guardian ad litem, ostensibly on behalf of the child. I am concerned that guardians ad litem, whose services are consistently used in cases involving the termination of parental rights and child neglect and used with increasing frequency in custody cases to protect the interests- of children, may be reluctant to serve as guardians ad litem if they are forced to defend their actions because of the anger of a parent who is not awarded custody. Hence, I would invite the Legislature to revisit the decision to exclude guardians ad litem from the scope of governmental immunity.