Under California law, as a general rule, a “minor who is a party in a lawsuit must appear ‘“by a guardian ad litem appointed by the court in which the action or proceeding is pending....” (Alex R. v. Superior Court of L.A. Cnty.(2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 1, 7-8 citing Code Civ. Proc., § 372(a); Williams v. Super. Ct. (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 36 at 46.) “In actions such as this one under the Uniform Parentage Act, Family Code § 7600 et seq., the Family Code also mandates that minor children be represented by a guardian ad litem: “If the child is a minor and a party to the action, the child shall be represented by a guardian ad litem appointed by the court.” (Fam.Code, § 7635(a).)
“The purpose of a guardian ad litem is to protect the minor's interests in the litigation” (Williams, supra, 147 Cal.App.4th at 47), and his or her role is limited in scope. “A guardian ad litem is not a party to the action, but is the party's representative and is an officer of the court.” (Id.) “The guardian ad litem ‘is like an agent with limited powers.’” (Id.) “‘[A] guardian ad litem's role is more than an attorney's but less than a party's.’” (Id.) “A guardian ad litem's role is limited to protecting the child's interests in the litigation, and the role is closely supervised by the judge.” (Id., at 50.)
A person who lacks the legal capacity to make decisions must appear “either by a guardian or conservator of the estate or by a guardian ad litem appointed by the court in which the action or proceeding is pending, or by a judge thereof, in each case.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 372(a)(1).) Appointment of a guardian ad litem for a person lacking legal competence may be made upon application of a relative or friend of the person lacking legal competence, or of any other party to the action, or by the court on its own motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 373(c).)
“Procedurally, if the petitioning minor is under 14 years old, ‘the appointment must be made before the summons is issued, upon the application of... a relative or friend of the minor.’” ((Williams, supra, 147 Cal.App.4th at 46–47 citing Code Civ. Proc., § 373(a).) “As the Code of Civil Procedure requires that a guardian ad litem be appointed before the summons may be issued, the court's refusal to appoint a guardian ad litem prevents him from obtaining a summons and commencing his parentage action.” (Id.)
“The Code of Civil Procedure and the Family Code contain no express requirement of notice to a parent before a guardian ad litem is appointed.” (Alex R. v. Superior Court of L.A. Cnty. (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 1, 9 citing Code Civ. Proc., §§ 372, 373 ; Fam.Code, § 7635 ; Williams, supra, 147 Cal.App.4th at p. 48, 54 [“there is no specific statutory requirement that a parent be notified if a nonparent applies to serve as the guardian ad litem”].) “It is a ‘cardinal rule of statutory construction’ (Alex. R. supra, 248 Cal.App.4th at 9 citing People v. Guzman (2005) 35 Cal.4th 577, 587) that court must not ‘insert what has been omitted’ from a statute.” (Alex. R. citing Code Civ. Proc., § 1858.)
“In fact, the guardian ad litem laws suggest that the Legislature acted with a specific intent not to require notice of a guardian ad litem application in most circumstances.” (Alex. R. supra, 248 Cal.App.4th at 9.) “The guardian ad litem statute in the Code of Civil Procedure requires parental notice in only one specific instance, not applicable here: when a minor who is living with a parent or guardian appears in court without counsel and seeking one of a set of identified restraining orders or protective orders.” (Id.) “In that instance, notice of the appointment of a guardian ad litem must be sent to at least one parent or guardian of the minor unless the court determines that notice would not be in the child's best interest.” (Id., citing Code Civ. Proc., § 372(b)(2).)
“Not only is there no requirement in the law for service of the guardian ad litem application, the statutes concerning service and notice of actions under the Uniform Parentage Act provide no mechanism for serving the additional pre-summons notice that the court here required.” (Alex. R. supra, 248 Cal.App.4th at 10.) “The Family Code requires that all parents, including presumptive parents, be notified of a parentage action in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.” (Id., citing Fam.Code, §§ 7635(b), 7666.) “The Code of Civil Procedure requires notice of an action to be effectuated by delivering a ‘copy of the summons and of the complaint to the person to be served.’” (Id., citing Code Civ. Proc., § 415.10.)
“It is a settled principle of statutory interpretation that if a statute contains a provision regarding one subject, that provision's omission in the same or another statute regarding a related subject is evidence of a different legislative intent.” (People v. Arriaga (2014) 58 Cal.4th 950, 960, 169; see also Wasatch Property Management v. Degrate (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1111, 1118.) “Accordingly, the Legislature's express requirement of notice in one specific instance of a guardian ad litem appointment, juxtaposed with its omission of such a requirement with respect to all other guardian ad litem appointments, indicates the Legislature's intent not to require service where it did not do so expressly.” (Alex. R. supra, 248 Cal.App.4th at 9 citing Arriaga, at 960, [where certificate of probable cause was required before bringing an appeal under one subdivision of a statute but not mentioned in another, the omission indicated the Legislature's intent not to require the certificate in the latter instance].)
“The appointment of a guardian ad litem for a child does not ‘affect [a parent's] parental rights. Instead, the guardian ad litem determination merely concerns a decision as to who will represent the children in retaining and working with their attorney and assist the court in protecting the children's legal interests.’” (Alex R. supra at 10 citing Williams, supra, 147 Cal.App.4th at 54.)
The Court continued the hearing to July 26, 2021 to allow Petitioner to perfect and resubmit the application for appointment of guardian ad litem. On July 26, 2021, the Court noted Petitioner had yet to resubmit an application for appointment of guardian ad litem and continued the hearing to allow Petitioner to perfect and resubmit the application for appointment of guardian ad litem. Petitioner filed an application for appointment of guardian ad litem on August 19, 2021.
DINA GOMEZ VS ALLISON ELIZABETH PETERS, ET AL.
20STCV03163
Aug 26, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
The Court continued the hearing to July 26, 2021 to allow Petitioner to perfect and resubmit the application for appointment of guardian ad litem. Petitioner has yet to resubmit an application for appointment of guardian ad litem. Accordingly, the petition is CONTINUED to August 26, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. to allow Petitioner to perfect and resubmit the application for appointment of Guardian ad Litem.
DINA GOMEZ VS ALLISON ELIZABETH PETERS, ET AL.
20STCV03163
Jul 26, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
In its April 25, 2018 Minute Order, the Court instructed Petitioner to complete and file an (1) Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem in compliant with CCP § 373(a); and (2) Order to Deposit Money into Blocked Account on Form MC-355. At the hearing on May 16, 2018, the court noted that on April 4 and 30, 2018, Petitioner attempted to file an Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem, but it was rejected both times.
KENNEDY KAMPEN VS KATHLEEN COOK
18STLC04343
Jun 25, 2018
Georgina Torres Rizk or Jon R. Takasugi
Los Angeles County, CA
Having reviewed the legal file, the Court notes that an AMENDED Minor's Compromise Petition was filed on 06/01/2021 and the Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem, was filed and rejected on 06/02/2021. There being no guardian ad litem yet appointed, and to allow Plaintiff/Petitioner to perfect and resubmit the Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem, the Court orders hearing on the Petition continued to the date and time as indicated below.
DINA GOMEZ VS ALLISON ELIZABETH PETERS, ET AL.
20STCV03163
Jun 04, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
In its April 25, 2018 Minute Order, the Court instructed Petitioner to complete and file an (1) Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem in compliant with CCP § 373(a); and (2) Order to Deposit Money into Blocked Account on Form MC-355. At the hearing on May 16, 2018, the court noted that on April 4 and 30, 2018, Petitioner attempted to file an Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem, but it was rejected both times.
KENNEDY KAMPEN VS KATHLEEN COOK
18STLC04343
Aug 17, 2018
Wendy Chang or Jon R. Takasugi
Los Angeles County, CA
The Court has inherent authority to remove a guardian ad litem. ( Golin v. Allenby (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 616, 643-44.) Plaintiff moves to terminate the appointment of guardian ad litem Everilda Gonzalez because Plaintiff is no longer a minor. As a result, a guardian ad litem is no longer necessary. The motion is GRANTED.
MICHAEL, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, EVERILDA GONZALEZ TINOCO VS JOSEPH FRANK SANTILLAN , ET AL.
19STCV07739
Jul 29, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
In its April 25, 2018 Minute Order, the Court instructed Petitioner to complete and file: Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem in compliant with CCP § 373(a); and Order to Deposit Money into Blocked Account on Form MC-355. The Court notes that on April 4 and 30, 2018, Petitioner attempted to file an Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem, but it was rejected both times.
KENNEDY KAMPEN VS KATHLEEN COOK
18STLC04343
May 16, 2018
Georgina Torres Rizk or Jon R. Takasugi
Los Angeles County, CA
APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM APPLICATION AND ORDER CVRI2102087 MADORE VS MASISADO FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM Tentative Ruling: Approve appointment of Deborah Madore as GAL for Indiie Jones and Iilya Mengistead.
MADORE VS MASISADO
CVRI2102087
Aug 11, 2021
Riverside County, CA
The Court set a hearing on November 8 on approval of the stipulation, applications for appointment of guardian ad litem in both this case and the probate case, and petitions to approve minors’ compromises in both cases. However, only two applications for appointment of guardian ad litem were filed in this case. Nothing was filed in the probate case.
JACK DARIAN VS MARTY FAST ET AL
1370537
Nov 08, 2011
Santa Barbara County, CA
The Court set a hearing on November 8 on approval of the stipulation, applications for appointment of guardian ad litem in both this case and the probate case, and petitions to approve minors’ compromises in both cases. However, only two applications for appointment of guardian ad litem were filed in this case. Nothing was filed in the probate case.
ESTATE OF JANET R DARIAN
1369721
Nov 08, 2011
Santa Barbara County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Appointment of Guardian of the Person and Estate; Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Petition for Guardianship: Recommended for approval. Appearances are still required. Petition for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem: Appearances required. Counsel should be prepared to discuss whether the estates of the minor’s parents will be probated or pass outside of probate (e.g., does a trust exist).
GUARDIANSHIP OF DYLAN HAMILTON
15PR00432
Jan 12, 2016
Santa Barbara County, CA
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PETITION FOR ORDER TERMINATING APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM Plaintiff Lowe’s Petition for Order Terminating Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem is GRANTED. The Court considered the moving papers. No opposition was filed.
RONALD LOWE JR ET AL VS R-3 CONTRACTORS ET AL
BC629672
Dec 02, 2016
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
The Court finds/orders: The Court GRANTS the application for appointment of guardian ad litem. Plaintiff Tammy Ford is hereby appointed as the guardian ad litem for Plaintiff Stanley James Ford. Order is signed on this date. DATE: 09/01/2021 MINUTE ORDER Page 1 DEPT: 20 VEN-FNR-10.03
2021-00556981
Sep 01, 2021
Ventura County, CA
The hearing on this petition was continued twice to permit Petitioner submit an Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem. The Court’s file does not reflect that Petitioner complied with the order. Therefore, the settlement cannot be approved at this time. The hearing is continued to April 2, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. in Department SS-29. If it has not already been submitted, Petitioner is ordered to submit an Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem forthwith for signature.
ALEXANDER MORALES, ET AL. VS VERONICA WALKER, ET AL.
19STCV05249
Feb 18, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
Before the court are the amended applications and orders for appointment of guardian ad litem and expedited petitions to approve compromise of pending action for minor claimants Nareman Hussein and Kamila Hussein. ANALYSIS: I. Applications and Orders for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem A.
ALI HUSSEIN, ET AL. VS ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
21STCP00080
Jul 28, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
Other
Intellectual Property
MFS Fleet Inc CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Auto EVENT TYPE: Application (CLM) For Appointment of Guardian ad Litem APPEARANCES Armineh Yousef, counsel, present for Guardian Ad Litem,Plaintiff(s) remotely via video. Joseph Duque, present, counsel for Defendant, remotely via video. At 8:47 a.m., court convenes in this matter with all parties present as previously indicated.
2022-00563880
Aug 17, 2022
Ventura County, CA
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO FILE APPLICATION FOR GUARDIAN AD LITEM UNDER SEAL On September 19, 2018, Plaintiff John Doe (“Plaintiff”), a minor, by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Alexandra Thompson, filed this action against Defendants Mcrory Pediatric Services, Inc. and Adewole Williams for injuries sustained on March 10, 2017. Plaintiff moves to file the Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem under seal to protect Plaintiff’s privacy interests.
JOHN DOE VS MCRORY PEDIATRIC SERVICES INC ET AL
BC722528
Apr 24, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
other
However, the court’s file does not reflect that Petitioner submitted an Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem. Therefore, the settlement cannot be approved at this time. The hearing is continued to Tuesday, December 23, 2019 at 1:30 p.m. in Department SS-2. Petition is ordered to submit an Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem forthwith for signature. Moving party to give notice.
ALEXANDER MORALES, ET AL. VS VERONICA WALKER, ET AL.
19STCV05249
Nov 26, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Case Number: 20STCV47691 Hearing Date: December 9, 2022 Dept: 28 Plaintiffs Robyn Ross and Kimberly Edwards Motion to Removed Incorrectly Filed Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.
ROBYN ROSS, ET AL. VS ICEF INGLEWOOD ELEMENTARY CHARTER ACADEMY, ET AL.
20STCV47691
Dec 09, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
.: BC604281 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM Dept. 98 1:30 p.m. April 12, 2017 On December 16, 2015, Plaintiff Orlando Cordon (“Plaintiff”) commenced this action against Defendant Eugene N. Sun (“Defendant”) for alleged damages arising out of a July 13, 2014 vehicle versus pedestrian collision. The Court is in receipt of an Opposition to Plaintiff’s Application an Order for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem filed by Defendant on March 29, 2017.
ORLANDO CORDON VS. EUGENE N. SUN
BC604281
Apr 12, 2017
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
Puckett filed the instant Petitions, as well as the Applications for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem and the initial Petition to Open Superior Court File for Purposes of Appointment of Guardian ad Litem. Mr. Puckett was appointed as counsel for Respondent by Respondent’s liability insurance carrier, Allstate Indemnity Company. Mr. Puckett offered to tender the policy limits of Respondent’s insurance policy and scheduled a mediation to arrange the payment. Mr.
ALEX KETABCHI VS ELPIDIO CRUZ
BS163371
Apr 14, 2017
Los Angeles County, CA
Now Plaintiffs have presented a new petition for approval, but AGAIN never filed any petition for appointment of guardian ad litem. This is holding up the conclusion of this case. August 10, 2022 Law and Motion Calendar PAGE 3
LINA BRENIS VS. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, ET AL
19-CIV-00987
Aug 14, 2022
San Mateo County, CA
Case Number: 21STCP00080 Hearing Date: July 12, 2021 Dept: 34 SUBJECT: (1) Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Moving Party : Petitioner Malaad Alewi for Claimant Kamila Hussein Resp. Party : None (2) Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Moving Party : Petitioner Malaad Alewi for Claimant Nareman Hussein Resp.
ALI HUSSEIN, ET AL. VS ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
21STCP00080
Jul 12, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
Other
Intellectual Property
Plascensia asserts that she is the guardian ad litem for Montes. However, no guardian ad litem has ever been approved in this matter. Between the filing of the Complaint on May 26, 2017 and July 31, 2018, Plaintiff never filed any application for appointment of a guardian ad litem in this case. On July 31, 2018, Plaintiff attached an application for appointment of guardian ad litem as the last two pages of the instant petition to approve the compromise. This was improper.
STEVEN MONTES VS ANGELA ESPINOZA
BC662690
Sep 06, 2018
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
One of those grounds was that Petitioner(s) must has/have an order appointing her as guardian ad litem for Claimant(s). On 10/10/19, the Court rejected all requests for appointment of guardian ad litem. Petitioner has not filed new requests for appointment of guardian ad litem at this time. The Court will not consider the petitions until appointment of a guardian ad litem is finalized. Petitioner must re-file the petitions and set them for a new hearing date upon appointment of a guardian ad litem.
MARIA LOPEZ-TRUJILLO ET AL VS RENAE MARTICORENA
BC566686
Dec 03, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Instead, litigation must be conducted through a guardian, conservator of the estate or guardian ad litem. (Code Civ. Proc., § 372(a).) If a guardian or conservator has not previously been appointed for the person lacking decision-making capacity, a guardian ad litem must be appointed unless one of the limited statutory exceptions applies. (Code Civ. Proc., § 372(a).) Here, it is unclear whether Plaintiff lacks capacity to sue in her own name and whether appointment of guardian ad litem is necessary.
MCCULLOUGH VS. ZHANG
30-2019-01061841
Aug 11, 2020
Orange County, CA
. § 372(a) provides that a minor must appear in litigation by a guardian or conservator of her estate or a Guardian Ad Litem appointed by the court. The Court cannot rule on the instant Petition, until Petitioner is appointed guardian ad litem for minor Ashley Lemus. The Court had continued the hearing on the Petition and ordered Petitioner to file a complete Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem for Minor Ashley Lemus. (9-27-22 Minute Order.)
22STLC02238
Nov 15, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Absent objection, Mr. Cote will be appointed Guardian ad Litem.
ESTATE OF JEROEN PETER KOORNWINDER
18PR00188
Nov 29, 2018
Santa Barbara County, CA
Sierra Madre Avenue, LLC dba Silverado Sierra Vista’s Motion for an Order Allowing Alternative Means of Service on, or for Appointment of a Guardian ad Litem for, Defendant Peggy Condit is denied at this time. Plaintiff, on its own, may file an Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem on California Judicial Council Form CIV-010. Discussion Plaintiff Subtenant 125 W.
SUBTENANT 125 W. SIERRA MADRE AVENUE, LLC VS PEGGY A CONDIT, ET AL.
18STLC14580
Mar 14, 2019
James E. Blancarte or Wendy Chang
Los Angeles County, CA
The Court intends to grant the ex parte Petition for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem and appoint Christopher Young as Guardian ad Litem of Luke Peek.
IN THE MATTER OF CHAD MICHAEL PEEK
56-2018-00519891-PR-LA-OXN
Nov 15, 2019
Ventura County, CA
Notes on pending ex parte petitions for appointment of guardian ad litem were e-mailed to counsel for personal representative and proposed guardian ad litem on 12/28/2020.
THE ESTATE OF AMY J. REECE
PES18301666
Jan 04, 2021
EDWARD MIYAUCHI
San Francisco County, CA
FCS051729 Compromise of Minors’ Claims TENTATIVE RULING Attorney and each Guardian ad litem to appear. Page 1 of 2 RENELL DUDLEY III’s Petition to Terminate Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem TENTATIVE RULING The petition is granted.
GARAY V. DAN PALMER TRUCKING, INC.
FCS051729
Nov 08, 2021
Solano County, CA
FCS051729 Compromise of Minors’ Claims TENTATIVE RULING Attorney and each Guardian ad litem to appear. Page 1 of 2 RENELL DUDLEY III’s Petition to Terminate Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem TENTATIVE RULING The petition is granted.
GARAY V. DAN PALMER TRUCKING, INC.
FCS051729
Nov 09, 2021
Solano County, CA
FCS051729 Compromise of Minors’ Claims TENTATIVE RULING Attorney and each Guardian ad litem to appear. Page 1 of 2 RENELL DUDLEY III’s Petition to Terminate Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem TENTATIVE RULING The petition is granted.
GARAY V. DAN PALMER TRUCKING, INC.
FCS051729
Nov 04, 2021
Solano County, CA
FCS051729 Compromise of Minors’ Claims TENTATIVE RULING Attorney and each Guardian ad litem to appear. Page 1 of 2 RENELL DUDLEY III’s Petition to Terminate Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem TENTATIVE RULING The petition is granted.
GARAY V. DAN PALMER TRUCKING, INC.
FCS051729
Nov 07, 2021
Solano County, CA
FCS051729 Compromise of Minors’ Claims TENTATIVE RULING Attorney and each Guardian ad litem to appear. Page 1 of 2 RENELL DUDLEY III’s Petition to Terminate Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem TENTATIVE RULING The petition is granted.
GARAY V. DAN PALMER TRUCKING, INC.
FCS051729
Nov 05, 2021
Solano County, CA
FCS051729 Compromise of Minors’ Claims TENTATIVE RULING Attorney and each Guardian ad litem to appear. Page 1 of 2 RENELL DUDLEY III’s Petition to Terminate Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem TENTATIVE RULING The petition is granted.
GARAY V. DAN PALMER TRUCKING, INC.
FCS051729
Nov 06, 2021
Solano County, CA
On June 8, 2022, Plaintiff filed application and order for appointment of guardian ad litem was filed and granted. Legal Standard Code of Civil Procedure section 372, subdivision (a)(1) provides in pertinent part that when a person who lacks legal capacity to make decisions . . . is a party, that person shall appear . . . by guardian ad litem appointed by the court in which the action or proceeding is pending . . . .
B. C., ET AL. VS PETER BURNETT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, ET AL.
20STCV29828
Jun 14, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
BOCANEGRA vs BRIGHT Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Civil CVRI2202499 FUTURES ACADEMY LLC (Adult) Tentative Ruling: Granted. The court finds that it is reasonable and necessary to appoint Rene Bocanegra as guardian ad litem in this matter for Clarissa Bocanegra. The proposed order will be signed at the hearing.
BOCANEGRA VS BRIGHT FUTURES ACADEMY LLC
CVRI2202499
Jul 29, 2022
Riverside County, CA
The Court’s file does not reflect that Petitioner, Destany Wallace, was appointed Guardian ad Litem for the Claimant. The Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem was REJECTED on 8/31/16. The Court orders that the Application be resubmitted by an appointed Guardian ad Litem. Moving party to give notice.
KEYINNA THOMAS ET AL VS NATHAN G PARNELL ET AL
BC630012
Jul 09, 2018
Los Angeles County, CA
All five of the Ex Parte Orders for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem are VACATED.
KHALI-MALIK BEY, ET AL. VS MERCY HOUSING CALIFORNIA 56, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
23STCV12196
Aug 24, 2023
Los Angeles County, CA
MSP20-00496 LIMITED CONSERVATORSHIP OF LUCAS VASQUEZ 9:00 AM HEARING IN RE: PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM FILED ON 06/08/23 BY ANDREW VASQUEZ Superseded by Line # 2.B.
MSP17-01787
Jul 07, 2023
Contra Costa County, CA
Counsel was ordered to obtain a signed order approving appointment of the Guardian ad Litem. The court’s file reflects that counsel submitted an Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem on 10/30/19, which has not yet been signed. The court continues the hearing to 12/18/19 to permit the application to be processed. Moving party is ordered to give notice.
JOSHUA DAVIS HUBBARD ET AL VS BROCK DAVIS RIDENOUR ET AL
BC705943
Nov 12, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Ten days leave to February 6, 2017 to file an Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem. If an Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem – Civil (Judicial Council Form CIV-010) is filed on or before 4:00 pm. on February 6, 2017, the ruling on the demurrer shall be amended on February 7, 2017 to state that the demurrer is overruled in its entirety and that defendants have twenty days to answer.
LISA FRIZZEL CASAS ET AL VS JAMES ALLEN LICHNOVSKY
BC596255
Jan 27, 2017
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
Causal Document & Date Filed : Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Under the Probate Code, 08/11/2015 Grant ex parte application to appoint Michelle Hodapp, guardian ad litem for her two children, Sadie Dubois and Sofia Dubois. Grant ex parte application to appoint Lacy Enderson, co-special administrators of the estate of Ms. Enderson's son, Shaun Dubois. The appointment is contingent upon both co-special administrators posting bond of $1.7 million.
IN THE MATTER OF SHAUN DEAN DUBOIS
56-2015-00470835-PR-LA-OXN
Aug 12, 2015
Ventura County, CA
Appointment of a Guardian ad Litem is necessary to represent their interests in this estate administration pursuant to Probate Code Section 1003. A Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem is required to be filed, and once appointed, notice is required to be given to the guardian ad litem. Otherwise, the paperwork appears to be in order. The matter is set for Monday, July 31, 2023, at 2:30 p.m. in Department 7 for further proceedings on the Petition. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
ESTATE OF LARSON
23PB-0032019
Jun 25, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Appointment of a Guardian ad Litem is necessary to represent their interests in this estate administration pursuant to Probate Code Section 1003. A Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem is required to be filed, and once appointed, notice is required to be given to the guardian ad litem. Otherwise, the paperwork appears to be in order. The matter is set for Monday, July 31, 2023, at 2:30 p.m. in Department 7 for further proceedings on the Petition. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
ESTATE OF LARSON
23PB-0032019
Jun 27, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Appointment of a Guardian ad Litem is necessary to represent their interests in this estate administration pursuant to Probate Code Section 1003. A Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem is required to be filed, and once appointed, notice is required to be given to the guardian ad litem. Otherwise, the paperwork appears to be in order. The matter is set for Monday, July 31, 2023, at 2:30 p.m. in Department 7 for further proceedings on the Petition. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
ESTATE OF LARSON
23PB-0032019
Jun 30, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Appointment of a Guardian ad Litem is necessary to represent their interests in this estate administration pursuant to Probate Code Section 1003. A Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem is required to be filed, and once appointed, notice is required to be given to the guardian ad litem. Otherwise, the paperwork appears to be in order. The matter is set for Monday, July 31, 2023, at 2:30 p.m. in Department 7 for further proceedings on the Petition. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
ESTATE OF LARSON
23PB-0032019
Jun 28, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Appointment of a Guardian ad Litem is necessary to represent their interests in this estate administration pursuant to Probate Code Section 1003. A Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem is required to be filed, and once appointed, notice is required to be given to the guardian ad litem. Otherwise, the paperwork appears to be in order. The matter is set for Monday, July 31, 2023, at 2:30 p.m. in Department 7 for further proceedings on the Petition. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
ESTATE OF LARSON
23PB-0032019
Jun 29, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Appointment of a Guardian ad Litem is necessary to represent their interests in this estate administration pursuant to Probate Code Section 1003. A Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem is required to be filed, and once appointed, notice is required to be given to the guardian ad litem. Otherwise, the paperwork appears to be in order. The matter is set for Monday, July 31, 2023, at 2:30 p.m. in Department 7 for further proceedings on the Petition. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
ESTATE OF LARSON
23PB-0032019
Jun 26, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Accordingly, this Court previously continued the Motion for the parties to meet and confer as to Plaintiff’s legal capacity and whether appointment of guardian ad litem was necessary. No further papers have been filed and thus, the Court can only assume appointment of guardian ad litem is not necessary at this time. Accordingly, the Motion is GRANTED and Plaintiff is ordered to attend and testify at her deposition.
MCCULLOUGH VS. ZHANG
30-2019-01061841
Sep 15, 2020
Orange County, CA
Petition and Report for Final Distribution, Request for Allowance for Ordinary Attorneys Fees and Waiver of Administrator’s Commission, Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem, Allowance for Administrative Costs and Waiver on Accounting PREGRANT ORDER The petition to appoint guardian ad litem is granted. The court finds all notices have been given as required by law. The petition as modified by the Supplement filed March 27, 2019 is granted.
IN RE THE ESTATE OF MICHAEL SEAMON GORDON, DECEASED
FPR049073
Mar 28, 2019
Solano County, CA
DISCUSSION According to the Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem (“Application”), David Esquibias, esq. was appointed guardian ad litem of the estate of Zachary M. Oseas and Jeremy T. Oseas in the probate matter in Ventura County. The Application states that the court previously stated that the probate guardianship in Ventura County has no effect on instant matter and requested an application for guardian ad litem to be filed in this mater.
GENWORTH LIFE AND ANNUITY INS CO VS PHILIP OSEAS ET AL
BC700410
Sep 11, 2018
Los Angeles County, CA
The court notes that an application for guardian ad litem was finally filed on February 24, 2017. However, that application has yet to be ruled on. This demurrer cannot be considered until the issue of whether a guardian ad litem is appointed is addressed. As such, the hearing on this demurrer is continued. Plaintiff is ordered to submit a courtesy copy of the application for appointment of guardian ad litem directly to Department 77 by April 21, 2017. Moving party to give notice.
DAVIS, REBECCA VS KITCHEN, KRISTOPHER P
16K03491
Apr 17, 2017
Elaine Lu or Yolanda Orozco
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
Rules of Court, Rule 7.950.5(c)(3) because Petition did not obtain orders appointing a Guardian ad Litem for the Claimants. The court’s file reflects that two Applications for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem were submitted 4/28/19 but have not been signed by the court. Therefore, the court continues the hearing to 6/24/19, to permit the applications to be finalized. Moving party is ordered to give notice.
CARMEN HERNANDEZ VS KARINA CERVANTES
18STCV01044
May 22, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
other
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem
ESTATE OF PETER ANTHONY REMEDIOS
22PR00231
Apr 13, 2023
Santa Barbara County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem
ESTATE OF ANTONIETTA BERNARDI
16PR00529
Mar 23, 2017
Santa Barbara County, CA
Petitioner filed an Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem on 1/11/18, but that application has been rejected. The petition cannot go forward with a Guardian ad Litem. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 372(a)(1). The hearing is taken OFF CALENDAR. Petitioner is ordered to comply with the court’s 12/21/17 order and set a new hearing date after a Guardian ad Litem has been appointed and an amended petition has been prepared consistent with the courts order. Moving party is ordered to give notice.
PORSHE WILLSON VS PAOLA VASQUEZ
BC660304
Mar 22, 2018
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
Petitioner’s application for appointment of Guardian ad Litem was granted and Petitioner was appointed as Claimant’s guardian ad litem on May 23, 2018. Additionally, the Court finds that the proposed settlement of $7,000.00, minus $2,600.00 for medical expenses, $1,750.00 for attorney’s fees (25%), and $225.00 for costs, resulting in a net balance of $2,425.00 to Claimant to be fair and reasonable.
ADAM GARBAWI VS SHIVA KHATAMI
17STLC03798
Jul 30, 2018
Wendy Chang or Jon R. Takasugi
Los Angeles County, CA
Case Number: 22STCV14870 Hearing Date: June 29, 2022 Dept: 52 Tentative Ruling Plaintiff Jane Doe 1s Motion to Seal Records and Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Plaintiff Jane Doe 1, a minor, moves to seal portions of her application for appointment of guardian ad litem.
JANE DOE 1,, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER GUARDIAN AD LITEM, A. A. VS ANTELOPE VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL.
22STCV14870
Jun 29, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem No tentative.
MATTER OF CAMERON FAMILY TRUST
1070143
Nov 18, 2010
Santa Barbara County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem No tentative.
MATTER OF CAMERON FAMILY TRUST
1070143
Jan 13, 2011
Santa Barbara County, CA
PEDERSEN and RESPONDENT: CHRISTINE CHALK NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ORDER — OTHER: APPLICATION FOR EX PARTE APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM RULING This matter is set for hearing on the Ex Parte Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem filed on 2/2/2024. Appearances required. TEMPORARILY, under current orders, litigants who require the assistance of a Spanish language interpreter shall appear in person.
FL0000403
Feb 07, 2024
Marin County, CA
PEDERSEN and RESPONDENT: CHRISTINE CHALK NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ORDER — OTHER: APPLICATION FOR EX PARTE APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM RULING This matter is set for hearing on the Ex Parte Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem filed on 2/2/2024. Appearances required. TEMPORARILY, under current orders, litigants who require the assistance of a Spanish language interpreter shall appear in person.
FL0000403
Feb 08, 2024
Marin County, CA
PEDERSEN and RESPONDENT: CHRISTINE CHALK NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ORDER — OTHER: APPLICATION FOR EX PARTE APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM RULING This matter is set for hearing on the Ex Parte Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem filed on 2/2/2024. Appearances required. TEMPORARILY, under current orders, litigants who require the assistance of a Spanish language interpreter shall appear in person.
FL0000403
Feb 09, 2024
Marin County, CA
PEDERSEN and RESPONDENT: CHRISTINE CHALK NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ORDER — OTHER: APPLICATION FOR EX PARTE APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM RULING This matter is set for hearing on the Ex Parte Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem filed on 2/2/2024. Appearances required. TEMPORARILY, under current orders, litigants who require the assistance of a Spanish language interpreter shall appear in person.
FL0000403
Feb 06, 2024
Marin County, CA
Schwartz’ representation that his client “is not capabl of dealing with litigation matters” and requires the appointment of a guardian ad litem, and th fact that a proper application for appointment of guardian ad litem has not been made, th sanctions are awarded solely against Mr. Schwartz.
SANTA CRUZ ROUNDTREE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION V NEEL
18CV01410
Feb 21, 2019
Santa Cruz County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition: Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem; Petition: Modify Trust; Approval of Accounting
MATTER OF YOUNG FAMILY TRUST ET AL
23PR00062
Apr 13, 2023
Santa Barbara County, CA
Case Number: 23CV-0202392 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of the Guardian Ad Litem. Plaintiff provided two Applications for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem and both were returned to counsel due to deficiencies in the Applications. An Application was received on September 19, 2023 and has executed the Order. The Settlement Conference date of February 26, 2024 at 1:30 p.m. and trial date of April 30, 2024 at 8:45 a.m. are confirmed. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
AMARANT VS. MONARCH LEARNING CENTER CHARTER SCHOOL, ET AL.
23CV-0202392
Sep 28, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Case Number: 23CV-0202392 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of the Guardian Ad Litem. Plaintiff provided two Applications for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem and both were returned to counsel due to deficiencies in the Applications. An Application was received on September 19, 2023 and has executed the Order. The Settlement Conference date of February 26, 2024 at 1:30 p.m. and trial date of April 30, 2024 at 8:45 a.m. are confirmed. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
AMARANT VS. MONARCH LEARNING CENTER CHARTER SCHOOL, ET AL.
23CV-0202392
Sep 26, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Case Number: 23CV-0202392 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of the Guardian Ad Litem. Plaintiff provided two Applications for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem and both were returned to counsel due to deficiencies in the Applications. An Application was received on September 19, 2023 and has executed the Order. The Settlement Conference date of February 26, 2024 at 1:30 p.m. and trial date of April 30, 2024 at 8:45 a.m. are confirmed. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
AMARANT VS. MONARCH LEARNING CENTER CHARTER SCHOOL, ET AL.
23CV-0202392
Sep 23, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Case Number: 23CV-0202392 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of the Guardian Ad Litem. Plaintiff provided two Applications for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem and both were returned to counsel due to deficiencies in the Applications. An Application was received on September 19, 2023 and has executed the Order. The Settlement Conference date of February 26, 2024 at 1:30 p.m. and trial date of April 30, 2024 at 8:45 a.m. are confirmed. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
AMARANT VS. MONARCH LEARNING CENTER CHARTER SCHOOL, ET AL.
23CV-0202392
Sep 24, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Case Number: 23CV-0202392 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of the Guardian Ad Litem. Plaintiff provided two Applications for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem and both were returned to counsel due to deficiencies in the Applications. An Application was received on September 19, 2023 and has executed the Order. The Settlement Conference date of February 26, 2024 at 1:30 p.m. and trial date of April 30, 2024 at 8:45 a.m. are confirmed. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
AMARANT VS. MONARCH LEARNING CENTER CHARTER SCHOOL, ET AL.
23CV-0202392
Sep 25, 2023
Shasta County, CA
Case Number: 23CV-0202392 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of the Guardian Ad Litem. Plaintiff provided two Applications for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem and both were returned to counsel due to deficiencies in the Applications. An Application was received on September 19, 2023 and has executed the Order. The Settlement Conference date of February 26, 2024 at 1:30 p.m. and trial date of April 30, 2024 at 8:45 a.m. are confirmed. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
AMARANT VS. MONARCH LEARNING CENTER CHARTER SCHOOL, ET AL.
23CV-0202392
Sep 27, 2023
Shasta County, CA
CTD status of appointment of guardian ad litem, issuance of summons, and service of summons and complaint. hml
MARIA ALVAREZ VS ST JOHNS REGIONAL MEDICAL
56-2014-00448178-CU-MM-VTA
Jul 07, 2014
Miles Lang
Ventura County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Medical Malpractice
Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem No Tentative. Court will discuss Application with parties at hearing.
SUNWEST BANK V OAK PARK MANOR, LP
30-2019-01114433
Aug 01, 2020
Orange County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Matter is pre approved by the Court. Granted as prayed.
ESTATE OF THAIS B COUPLES
1306204
Aug 07, 2009
Santa Barbara County, CA
.: BC707798 Hearing Date: March 5, 2019 [TENTATIVE] order RE: plaintiff’s application for appointment of guardian ad litem This action arises from burns suffered by Plaintiff when a portable stove malfunctioned during an evening school program. Plaintiff, a minor, seeks to have her grandmother appointed as a guardian ad litem. The Court grants the application.
ASHLEY ROSALES VS ROWLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL
BC707798
Mar 05, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
other
First, the Court notes that Fawaz Alharbi (“Fawaz”), a close friend of Decedent’s, was meant to be appointed as the Guardian ad Litem for both Hamad and Abdulaziz, as indicated in the Applications for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem filed on December 4, 2013. However, the Orders accompanying those Applications erroneously name Asma as the Guardian ad Litem.
ESTATE OF AHMED ALSAADI ET AL VS JASON MONCIBAIS
BC525361
Mar 29, 2017
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
On August 15, 2018, petitioner's Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem was rejected by the court. Petitioner is to file a new application for such order. The Court continues the hearing to 9/25/18. Counsel is ordered to file a courtesy copy of the order appointing the guardian ad litem directly in Department SS2. Moving party is ordered to give notice.
FRANCISCO ADRIAN AGUILAR ET AL VS CHRISTOPHER STREULY ET AL
BC703047
Aug 27, 2018
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
The appearances of the parties are required for the hearing on plaintiffs’ motion for appointment of guardian ad litem for defendant Mary Eddy.
JOHNS, JO VS. EDDY, MARY CATHERINE
S-CV-0040542
Sep 06, 2018
Placer County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Instructions/Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Matter will be continued to 2/27/2009 per prior request from counsel.
MATTER OF LUCILE H FRANCIS TRUST
1304048
Jan 30, 2009
Santa Barbara County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Instructions/Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Matter will be continued to 1/30/2009 at the request of counsel.
MATTER OF LUCILE H FRANCIS TRUST
1304048
Jan 08, 2009
Santa Barbara County, CA
On 9/28/17, the Court appointed a Guardian ad Litem for Plaintiff, who was then a minor. A minor who is a party in an action shall appear by a guardian ad litem appointed by the court. Code Civ. Procedure § 372(a). Plaintiff’s birthday is 9/29/2000 according to the Plaintiff’s Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem. As such Plaintiff turned 18 on 9/29/18. As Plaintiff no longer requires a guardian ad litem, the court grants the motion and terminates the guardianship.
IC VS COMPTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL
BC665118
Apr 20, 2021
12/14/2022
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
other
On February 3, 2021, the Court approved Claimant’s application for appointment of guardian ad litem and ordered Petitioner appointed as Claimant’s guardian ad litem. While the Court is inclined to grant the petition, Petitioner has not submitted a proposed order to deposit funds into a blocked account (MC-355). Accordingly, the petition is CONTINUED to March 22, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. Petitioner is ordered to submit a completed proposed order to deposit funds into a blocked account.
ISAC, CASADO, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, MARIA CASADO VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, A PUBLIC ENTITY, ET AL.
20STCV33196
Mar 12, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
other
MOTION Notice Of Motion And Motion To Set Aside Appointment Of Guardian Ad Litem And To Amend Complaint GRANTED, NO OPPOSITION FILED. (302/AJR/ju)
STEVEN PACATTE ET AL VS. DON SEBASTIAN ET AL
CGC02406014
Nov 12, 2002
San Francisco County, CA
P23-00415 CONSERVATORSHIP OF: ANNE MARIE PARR 10:30 AM HEARING IN RE: RECONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM SET BY COURT Need: 1. Appearances
CONSERVATORSHIP OF: ANNE MARIE PARR
P23-00415
Jul 20, 2023
Contra Costa County, CA
MOTION TO TERMINATE APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR MCC1901468 AGUIRRE VS AGUIRRE APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM Tentative Ruling: Hearing required for a report from the Public Guardian.
AGUIRRE VS AGUIRRE
MCC1901468
Aug 24, 2022
Riverside County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Instructions/Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem The Court will instruct the trustee to distribute the estate to Richard's Trust and not be distributed outright.
MATTER OF LUCILE H FRANCIS TRUST
1304048
Feb 27, 2009
Santa Barbara County, CA
The court also previously found that Petitioner failed to obtain Court’s approval to be Claimant’s guardian ad litem or file a declaration attesting that Prob. Code § 3500 is satisfied. Petitioner has still not complied with the court’s order. No proof of service has been filed demonstrating service on Defendant. Petitioner’s application for appointment of Guardian Ad Litem, filed on April 13, 2018, was rejected by the clerk’s office. Finally, Petitioner has not submitted a declaration satisfying Prob.
ADAM GARBAWI VS SHIVA KHATAMI
17STLC03798
Jun 08, 2018
Georgina Torres Rizk or Jon R. Takasugi
Los Angeles County, CA
The Court’s file does not reflect that Petitioner, Adriana Del Torro, was appointed Guardian ad Litem for the Claimant. The Application for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem was REJECTED on 5/31/18. In support of the fee request, Counsel is also required to submit a “declaration from the attorney that addresses the factors listed in (b) that are applicable to the matter before the court.” Cal Rules of Court, Rule 7.955(c). The court continues the hearing to August 27, 2018.
FRANCISCO ADRIAN AGUILAR ET AL VS CHRISTOPHER STREULY ET AL
BC703047
Jul 12, 2018
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
Plaintiffs Nocile Shah Brar, a minor, Priya Shah, and Jaspret Brar's Application to File Under Seal Plaintiff's Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Please see minute order of 08/08/2017.
BRAR VS. HERITAGE OAK PRIVATE EDUCATION
30-2017-00935671-CU-JR-CXC
Aug 25, 2017
Orange County, CA
To date, Petitioner has not filed any additional papers, or an application for appointment of guardian ad litem. Accordingly, the Petition to Approve Compromise of Pending Action on Behalf of Minor is placed off calendar. Court clerk to give notice.
PABLO VARGAS VS SHAILESH TAMHANE
18STLC12377
Apr 11, 2019
James E. Blancarte or Wendy Chang
Los Angeles County, CA
On February 18, 2020, Petitioner’s Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem of Claimant was approved. Legal Standard & Discussion Court approval is required for all settlements of a minor’s claim. (See Prob. Code, §§ 3500, 3600, et seq.; Code Civ. Proc., § 372.)
URBINA KARMEN, ET AL. VS PAUL AZZI, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.
18STLC15128
Mar 02, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
A minor cannot represent himself and he can only appear in the action through a guardian ad litem. Cal. Code of Civil Procedure § 372. No application for appointment of guardian ad litem was ever filed. See mandatory Judicial Council form CIV-010. Further, a guardian ad litem cannot appear in pro per and must be represented by counsel. On December 20, 2018, a substitution of attorney was filed.
VULTAGGIO VS ESCONDIDO UNION SCHOOL
37-2018-00008701-CU-PO-NC
May 30, 2019
San Diego County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
other
MOTION TO TERMINATE APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR MCC1901468 AGUIRRE VS AGUIRRE APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM BY GRICELIDA AGUIRRE Tentative Ruling: The case will be called for hearing on July 22, 2022 at 830am.
AGUIRRE VS AGUIRRE
MCC1901468
Jul 21, 2022
Riverside County, CA
Amended Notice Of Motion And Motion To Set Aside Appointment Of Guardian Ad Litem And To Allow Amendment Of The Complaint GRANTED PROVIDED MOVING PARTY PROVIDES TIMELY PROOF OF SERVICE; NO OPPOSITION FILED. OTHERWISE OFF CALENDAR. (REQ/302/JU)
STEVEN PACATTE ET AL VS. DON SEBASTIAN ET AL
CGC02406014
Jul 16, 2003
San Francisco County, CA
The complaint names Maria Jacquez as the guardian ad litem for the minor plaintiffs. No Application and Order for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem appears to have been filed. In fact, the complaint seeks damages on behalf of the minor plaintiff and their mother, Ms. Jacquez. ROA # 1. As a result, Ms. Jacquez would not have likely been appointed as GAL. Civ. Proc. Code § 372; Local Rule 2.4.6. (Ms. Jacquez was dismissed on January 9, 2017. ROA #11.)
JACQUEZ VS KHOSHO
37-2016-00021141-CU-PA-CTL
Jun 22, 2017
San Diego County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
This Tentative Ruling is made by Judge Stephen Kaus Plaintiffs' unopposed Motion to Appoint Jose Vilchez as Guardian Ad Litem of Minor Plaintiffs Yaissa Vilchez and Brianna Vilchez (the "Motion") is GRANTED. The Court will execute and enter the two Applications and Orders for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem for each of minor plaintiffs Yaissa Vilchez and Brianna Vilchez submitted with the moving papers.
VILCHEZ VS HAYWARD SISTERS HOSPITAL
RG20056453
Dec 11, 2020
Alameda County, CA
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
Your content views addon has successfully been added.
No Worries!
Adding your team is easy
in the "Manage Company Users" tab
