Perrizo et al v. Oak Grove School District et al

Filing 10

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd granting 9 Motion to Appoint Guardians ad Litem. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/19/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

LISA PERRIZO, RANO PERRIZO, and
K.P., a minor, by and through his guardians
ad litem LISA PERRIZO and RANO
PERRIZO,
Plaintiffs,

14
15

Case No. 5:15-cv-01512 HRL
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIANS AD
LITEM
[Re: Dkt. 9]

v.

16
17
18
19
20

SANTA CLARA COUNTY OFFICE OF
EDUCATION, NANCY GUERRERO,
CAROLINA LLURIA, APRIL CARLSON,
DAVID DRIESBACH, and DOES 1-30,
Defendants.
Lisa and Rano Perrizo (Parents) request appointment as guardians ad litem for their son,

21

K.P. Specifically, Lisa Rano asks to be appointed guardian ad litem, and Rano Perrizo asks to be

22

appointed co-guardian ad litem.

23

Usually, “only one party may act in a representative capacity with respect to an infant or

24

incompetent who comes before the court.” Neilson v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 199 F.3d 642, 650

25

(2d Cir. 1999) (citing Garrick v. Weaver, 888 F.2d 687, 693 (10th Cir. 1989)). Permitting two

26

parties to represent minor children interferes with the orderly development of the lawsuit because

27

the minor children could take inconsistent positions through multiple representatives. Garrick,

28

888 F.2d at 693. Parents would have this court find that they have no conflicts of interest because

1

they “brought this action solely on behalf of their minor child . . ..” (Dkt. 9-4 at 3). However, the

2

amended complaint (the operative pleading) states that Parents are also suing for themselves.

3

(Dkt. 7). Nevertheless, on the record presented, it is not apparent that Parents’ appointment will

4

interfere with the orderly development of this lawsuit, and the court finds no basis to discredit

5

Parents’ representation as to their lack of any conflicting or adverse interests vis-a-vis those of

6

K.P. Accordingly, the court, in its discretion, grants their motion.

7
8
9
10

SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 19, 2015
______________________________________
HOWARD R. LLOYD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

1
2

5:15-cv-01512-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to:
Peter Wayne Alfert [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail]

3
Todd Alexander Boley

[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

4
5

Zoya Yarnykh

[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3