Hugunin et al v. Rocklin Unified School District et al

Filing 21

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 8/6/15 ORDERING based on the foregoing, the motion to appoint Jennifer Hugunin as guardian ad litem for D.H., Keith Caldwell and Nicole Hill as guardians ad litem for X.C., and Trishia Pitts as guardian ad litem for N.P. (ECF No. 18 ) is GRANTED. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

PETER W. ALFERT, SBN 83139
HINTON ALFERT & KAHN LLP
200 Pringle Ave., Suite 450
Walnut Creek, California 94596
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

TODD BOLEY, SBN 68119
ZOYA YARNYKH, SBN 258062
LAW OFFICE OF TODD BOLEY
2381 Mariner Square Drive, Suite 280
Alameda, CA 94501
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Attorneys for PLAINTIFFS JENNIFER
HUGUNIN, PATRICK HUGUNIN, D.H., KEITH
CALDWELL, NICOLE HILL, X.C., TRISHA PITTS,
CARL PITTS, and N.P.
ALLISON S. HYATT, SBN 217567
HYATT LAW, PC
915 Highland Pointe Drive, Suite 250
Roseville, CA 95678
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Attorney for PLAINTIFS TODD VROOMAN
LAURA VROOMAN, and S.V., RICHARD ROGERS,
TERRILL ROGERS and P.R., MICHELLE MANCOUR
and G.I.

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

JENNIFER HUGUNIN, PATRICK HUGUNIN,
D.H., a minor by and through his guardian ad
litem JENNIFER HUGUNIN; KEITH
CALDWELL, NICOLE HILL, X.C., a minor by
and through his guardian ad litem KEITH
CALDWELL, TRISHIA PITTS, CARL PITTS,
N.P., a minor by and through his guardian ad
litem TRISHIA PITTS, TODD VROOMAN,
LAURA VROOMAN, S.V., a minor by and
through his guardian ad litem TODD
VROOMAN, RICHARD ROGERS, TERRILL
ROGERS, P.R., a minor by and through his
guardian ad litem RICHARD ROGERS,
MICHELLE MANCOUR and G.I., a minor by
and through his guardian ad litem MICHELLE
MANCOUR,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ROCKLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
SHERRY MCDANIEL, CHARLES
THIBIDEAU, BETTY JO WESSINGER,
JANNA CAMBRA, KEVIN BROWN, ROGER
STOCK, DR. TODD CUTLER, and DOES 1-30,
Defendants.
ORDER RE: GAL
2:15-CV-00939-MCE-DAD

-1-

2:15-cv-00939-MCE-DAD
ORDER GRANTING THE MOTION
TO APPOINT PLAINTIFF JENNIFER
HUGUNIN AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM
FOR D.H, KEITH CALDWELL AND
NICOLE HILL AS GUARDIANS AD
LITEM FOR X.C., AND TRISHIA
PITTS AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM
FOR N.P.

1

INTRODUCTION

2
3

In this case, Jennifer Hugunin, Keith Caldwell and Nicole Hill, and Trishia Pitts, along with

4

their children D.H., X.C., and N.P., respectively, have sued Defendants ROCKLIN UNIFIED

5

SCHOOL DISTRICT, SHERRY MCDANIEL, CHARLES THIBIDEAU, BETTY JO

6

WESSINGER, JANNA CAMBRA, KEVIN BROWN, ROGER STOCK, DR. TODD CUTLER

7

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights and other

8

state and federal laws. The substance of their complaint is that Ms. McDaniel, the special day class

9

teacher, subjected the minor plaintiffs and other students in her classroom to ongoing verbal,

10

psychological and physical abuse during class, that they suffered physical and emotional injuries as

11

a result, and that the District and school employees and administrators responded to the incidents

12

improperly.

13

D.H., Keith Caldwell and Nicole Hill to be appointed as guardians ad litem for their son X.C., and

14

for Trishia Pitts to be appointed as guardian ad litem for her son N.P.

Plaintiffs move for Jennifer Hugunin to be appointed as guardian ad litem for her son

15
16

STANDARD

17
18

“A minor or an incompetent person who does not have a duly appointed representative may

19

sue by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem. The court must appoint a guardian ad litem – or

20

issue another appropriate order – to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in

21

an action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2)1

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

An individual’s capacity to sue is determined by the law of the individual’s domicile. Fed.
R. Civ. P. 17(b). Under California law, an individual under the age of eighteen is a minor. Cal.
1

“A ‘next friend’ who initiates suit in federal court bears the burden of proving his
suitability according to three general factors that are independent of the law of the forum state.
These factors are: 1) an adequate explanation of why the minor may not bring suit himself; 2) a
true dedication to the best interest of the minor; and 3) some significant relationship with the
minor.” Anthem Life Ins. Co. v. Olguin, No. 1:6-cv-101165, 2007 WL 1390672, at *2 (E.D. Cal.
May 9, 2007) (citing T.W. v. Brophy, 954 F.Supp. 1306, 1309 (E.D. Wis. 1996), aff’d, 124 F.3d
893, 896-97 (7th Cir. 1997)). “It appears to be the common practice to appoint a parent to act as
next friend for a child.” Anthem Life Ins. Co., 2007 WL 190672, at *2 (citing Gonzalez v. Reno,
212 F.3d 1338, 1352 (11th Cir. 2000)).
-2ORDER RE: GAL
2:15-cv-00939-MCE-DAD

1

Fam. Code § 6502. A minor may bring suit as long as a guardian conducts the proceedings. Cal.

2

Fam. Code § 6601. The court may appoint a guardian ad litem to represent a minor’s interests in

3

the litigation. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 372(a). In making the determination concerning the

4

appointment of a particular guardian ad litem, the court shall consider whether the minor and the

5

guardian have divergent interests. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 372(b)(1).

6

“’When there is a potential conflict between a perceived parental responsibility and an

7

obligation to assist the court in achieving a just and speedy determination of the action,’ a court has

8

the right to select a guardian ad litem who is not a parent if that guardian would best protect the

9

child’s interests.” Williams v. Super. Ct., 54 Cal. Rptr. 3d 13, 22-23 (Cal. Ct. App. 4th 2007)

10

(citing M.S. v. Wermers, 557 F.2d 170, 175 (8th Cir. 1977)). “[I]f the parent has an actual or

11

potential conflict of interest with his child, the parent has no right to control or influence the child’s

12

litigation.” Williams, 54 Cal. Rptr. 3d at 23.

13
14

ANALYSIS

15
16

D.H., X.C., and N.P. are under the age of eighteen, and are minors under California law.

17

Cal. Fam. Code § 6502. As minors, their ability to bring suit is contingent upon appointment by

18

the court of a guardian ad litem. A parent may serve as their guardian ad litem so long as the

19

parent does not have an interest adverse to the child’s interests.

20

Upon review of the complaint and motion and supporting declarations, the Court finds that

21

the parents have no adverse interests to those of the minors. The parents brought this action on

22

behalf of themselves and their minor children, but the Court finds no conflict between the claims.

23

Therefore, their appointment as guardians ad litem for their children is appropriate. See Burke v.

24

Smith, 252 F.3 d 1260, 1264 (11 th Cir. 2001)(“Generally, when a minor is represented by a parent

25

who is a party to the lawsuit and who has the same interests as the child there is no inherent

26

conflict of interest.”); see also Gonzalez v. Reno, 86 F. Supp. 2 d 1167, 1185 (S.D. Fla. 2000), aff’d

27

212 F.3 d 1338 (11 th Cir. 2000)(“[W]hen a parent brings an action on behalf of a child, and it is

28

evident that the interests of each are the same, no need exists for someone other than the parent to
-3ORDER RE: GAL
2:15-cv-00939-MCE-DAD

1

represent the child’s interests under Rule 17(c).”); Robidoux v. Wacker Family Trust, No. CIVS-

2

06-2334 LKK-DAD, 2009 WL 1531785, at *1 (E.D. Cal. May 29, 2009), rev’d on other grounds

3

by No. 09-16674, 2011 WL 1136241 (appointing plaintiff mother as guardian ad litem for plaintiff

4

children in housing discrimination case).

5
6

CONCLUSION

7
8
9
10
11

Based on the foregoing, the motion to appoint Jennifer Hugunin as guardian ad litem for
D.H., Keith Caldwell and Nicole Hill as guardians ad litem for X.C., and Trishia Pitts as guardian
ad litem for N.P. (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

Dated: August 6, 2015

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER RE: GAL
2:15-cv-00939-MCE-DAD

-4-