Hugunin et al v. Rocklin Unified School District et al

Filing 25

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 8/10/2015 GRANTING plaintiff's 20 Motion to Appoint Guardian ad Litem. Plaintiff Michelle Mancour is APPOINTED as Guardian Ad Litem for plaintiff G.I.. (Marciel, M)

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]

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 PLAINTIFFS TODD VROOMAN
LAURA VROOMAN, and S.V., RICHARD ROGERS,
TERRILL ROGERS and P.R., MICHELE MANCOUR
and G.I.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

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]

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.

28
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD
LITEM
HUGUNIN, et al., v. RUSD, et al.,

-1-

Case No: 2:15-cv-00939-MCE-DAD
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
APPOINT MICHELE MANCOUR AS
GUARDIAN AD LITEM OF
PLAINTIFF G.I.

1

INTRODUCTION

2
3

In this case, six minor children, and the parents of those children, have commenced an

4

action against defendants Rocklin Unified School District, Sherry McDaniel, Charles Thibideau,

5

Betty Jo Wessinger, Janna Cambra, Kevin Brown, Roger Stock and Dr. Todd Culter under 42

6

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

7

state laws. The substance of their Compliant is that the minor plaintiffs’ special education teacher,

8

Defendant Sherry McDaniel, subjected her students to repeated verbal and physical abuse during

9

class, that they suffered physical and emotional injuries as a result, and that Defendant Charles

10

Thibideau, the principal of the school, Defendant Janna Cambra, the Director of Special Education,

11

and other Rocklin Unified School District administrators responded to the incidents improperly.

12

Plaintiff Michele Mancour moves this Court for an order appointing her as guardian ad litem for

13

her son, minor plaintiff G.I. No party has opposed the motion.

14
15

STANDARD

16
17

Rule 17(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a minor or an incompetent

18

person who does not have a duly appointed representative may sue by a next friend or by a

19

guardian ad litem and “[t]he court must appoint a guardian ad litem -- or issue another appropriate

20

order -- to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action.” See

21

Fed.R.Civ.P. 17(c)(2).

22

An individual’s capacity to sue is determined by the law of the individual’s domicile. Fed.

23

R. Civ. P. 17(b). Under California law, an individual under the age of eighteen is a minor. Cal.

24

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

25

Code § 6601. In making the determination concerning the appointment of a particular guardian ad

26

litem, the court shall consider whether the minor and the guardian have divergent interests. Cal.

27

Code Civ. P. § 372(b)(1).

28
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD
LITEM
HUGUNIN, et al., v. RUSD, et al.,

-2-

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

child’s interests.” Williams v. Super. Ct., 147 Cal.App.3d 36, 49 (2007) (quoting M.S. v. Wermers,

5

557 F.2d 170, 175 (8th Cir. 1977).

6

A parent may serve as a minor plaintiff’s guardian ad litem provided that the parent does

7

not have interests adverse to those of the child, and “[g]enerally, when a minor is represented by a

8

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

9

conflict of interest.” Burke v. Smith, 252 F.3d 1260, 1264 (11th Cir. 2001); see also Gonzales v.

10

Reno, 86 F.Supp.2d 1167, 1185 (S.D. Fla. 2000), aff’d 212 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2000) (“[W]hen a

11

parent brings an action on behalf of a child, and it is evident that the interests of each are the same,

12

no need exists for someone other than the parent to represent the child’s interests under Rule

13

17(c).”)

14

According to the Declaration of Michele Mancour filed in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion,

15

G.I. is a minor and is currently ten years of age. Because G.I. is under the age of eighteen, he is a

16

minor under California law. Cal. Fam. Code § 6502. As a minor, his ability to bring suit is

17

contingent upon appointment by the Court of a guardian ad litem. Michele Mancour is G.I.’s

18

mother and is also a Plaintiff in this action. Ms. Mancour may serve as G.I.’s guardian ad litem

19

provided that she does not have any interests that are adverse to G.I.

20

Upon review of the Complaint, the Notice of Motion and Motion to Appoint Michele

21

Mancour as Guardian ad Litem of Plaintiff G.I., argument of counsel, and the Declaration of

22

Michele Mancour submitted in support thereof, the Court finds that Plaintiff Michele Macour has

23

no interests adverse to the interests of G.I. Ms. Mancour brought this action on behalf of her minor

24

son, and thus the Court finds no conflict with G.I.’s claims.

25
26
27
28
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD
LITEM
HUGUNIN, et al., v. RUSD, et al.,

-3-

1

CONCLUSION

2

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs Motion to Appoint Michele Mancour as Guardian ad

3

Litem for Plaintiff G.I. is GRANTED. The Court hereby appoints Michele Mancour as the

4

guardian ad litem for G.I.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 10, 2015

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD
LITEM
HUGUNIN, et al., v. RUSD, et al.,

-4-