Terminate the Appointment of a Guardian

Useful Rulings on Motion to Dissolve Guardian Ad Litem

Rulings on Motion to Dissolve Guardian Ad Litem

1-25 of 305 results

CURTIS JACKSON JR VS SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES INC ET AL

LeBlanc’s Motion to Relieve the Guardian Ad Litem The Court has discretion to remove Jackson as guardian ad litem. The guardian ad litem is an officer of the Court. (Sarracino v. Superior Court (1974) 13 Cal.3d 1, 13.) “The appointment of a guardian ad litem is subject to ongoing court supervision and the removal of a guardian ad litem, who functions partly as an officer of the court, is a matter within the court’s control to be exercised as part of its inherent powers.” (Golin v.

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2019

BEJARANO, DAMIAN VS GARCIA, LAZARO

The court will set an OSC re: Status of Guardian ad Litem. Legal Standard “The appointment of a guardian ad litem is subject to ongoing court supervision and the removal of a guardian ad litem, who functions partly as an officer of the court, is a matter within the court's control to be exercised as part of its inherent powers.” (Golin v. Allenby (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 616, 643-44.)

  • Hearing

    May 01, 2018

  • Judge

    Georgina Torres Rizk or Jon R. Takasugi

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LOWRY V. LOWRY

The bare bones ex parte application merely states a legal conclusion that William Lowry is incompetent and further concludes that the appointment of a guardian ad litem is necessary, because William Lowry is incapable of filing the action for recovery on his own behalf. (Ex Parte Application to Appoint Guardian Ad Litem, paragraphs 4.b. and 5.d.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 05, 2020

CLOWERS V. COUNTY OF FRESNO

“[T]he appointment of a guardian ad litem is subject to ongoing court supervision and the removal of a guardian ad litem, who functions partly as an officer of the court, is a matter within the court's control to be exercised as part of its inherent powers.” (Golin v. Allenby (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 616, 643-644, as modified on denial of reh'g (Dec. 23, 2010); In re Hathaway's Estate (1896) 111 Cal. 270, 271.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 04, 2016

IN RE THE HANNAH JUNE FIELD SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST

The October 27, 2015 hearing was continued to December 15, 2015, to allow for the appointment of a guardian ad litem for the special needs beneficiary. The appointed guardian ad litem filed written opposition to the account on November 13, 2015, seeking both removal and surcharge of the trustee. On December 2, 2015, the trustee requested, and the court authorized, continuance of the accounting/removal and surcharge hearing to January 19, 2016, 9:00 AM, J6.

  • Hearing

    Dec 15, 2015

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE THE HANNAH JUNE FIELD SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST

The October 27, 2015 hearing was continued to December 15, 2015, to allow for the appointment of a guardian ad litem for the special needs beneficiary. The appointed guardian ad litem filed written opposition to the account on November 13, 2015, seeking both removal and surcharge of the trustee. On December 2, 2015, the trustee requested, and the court authorized, continuance of the accounting/removal and surcharge hearing to January 19, 2016, 9:00 AM, J6.

  • Hearing

    Dec 15, 2015

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

JESSIE DAVIS AND JAMES DAVIS

To terminate the appointment of a guardian ad litem for James L. Davis in this case. On 6/23/14 Jessie formally requested the Court to take Judicial Notice of A. Indiana Rules of Court, Rules of Trial Procedure 4.1 and 4.15(F); she attached copies to her request; and B. Indiana court proceedings terminating the guardianship of James L. Davis (same documents referred to in her RFO and listed above) dated March 6, 2014, signed by the Judge of the Scott Circuit Court, and that court�s finding that Mr.

  • Hearing

    Aug 19, 2014

JESSIE DAVIS AND JAMES DAVIS

To terminate the appointment of a guardian ad litem for James L. Davis in this case. 3. To take Judicial Notice of Reporter�s Transcript and Order of the Circuit Court of Indiana, Scott County, terminating the Guardianship of James L. Davis, Adult, cause no. 72COI-1112-GU-47, In the Matter of the Guardianship of JAMES L. DAVIS, ADULT, dated March 6, 2014.

  • Hearing

    Jun 03, 2014

SUBTENANT 125 W. SIERRA MADRE AVENUE, LLC VS PEGGY A CONDIT, ET AL.

Appointment of a guardian ad litem for Defendant Condit is the appropriate means of ensuring that her interests are properly represented in this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for an order allowing alternative means of service on Defendant Condit, or for appointment of a Guardian ad Litem for Defendant Condit at this time is denied. Plaintiff, on its own, may file an Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem on California Judicial Council Form CIV-010. Court clerk to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Mar 14, 2019

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte or Wendy Chang

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SUBTENANT 125 W. SIERRA MADRE AVENUE, LLC VS PEGGY A CONDIT, ET AL.

Appointment of a guardian ad litem for Defendant Condit is the appropriate means of ensuring that her interests are properly represented in this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for an order allowing alternative means of service on Defendant Condit, or for appointment of a Guardian ad Litem for Defendant Condit at this time is denied. Plaintiff, on its own, may file an Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem on California Judicial Council Form CIV-010. Court clerk to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Mar 14, 2019

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte or Wendy Chang

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

AMADO CHAVEZ ET AL VS BONNIE BRAE INVESTMENT SERVICES LLC ET

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM Plaintiff Dora Isabel Rosales Maradiaga (“Maradiaga “) seeks to be relieved as guardian ad litem for her daughter, Plaintiff Dora Elizabeth Rosales Maradiaga (“Dora Elizabeth”). Plaintiff’s motion is unopposed.

  • Hearing

    Apr 26, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

BARRY JOHN MONTGOMERY JR VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Defendants move for a stay of proceedings until a guardian ad litem is appointed and to continue the trial an additional six months after the appointment. Trial is currently set for March 24, 2020. Plaintiff’s counsel has filed multiple applications for the appointment of a guardian ad litem, which were rejected for various reasons.

  • Hearing

    Feb 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

IN RE DURABLE POWR OF ATTORNEY OF CHRISTOPHER A KOSMATKA

The court approves the payment of the $3894, plus cost reimbursement of $60, incurred by guardian ad litem for professional services rendered through March 6, 2017.

  • Hearing

    Mar 15, 2017

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE DURABLE POWR OF ATTORNEY OF CHRISTOPHER A KOSMATKA

The court approves the payment of the $3894, plus cost reimbursement of $60, incurred by guardian ad litem for professional services rendered through March 6, 2017.

  • Hearing

    Mar 15, 2017

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE DURABLE POWR OF ATTORNEY OF CHRISTOPHER A KOSMATKA

The court approves the payment of the $3894, plus cost reimbursement of $60, incurred by guardian ad litem for professional services rendered through March 6, 2017.

  • Hearing

    Mar 15, 2017

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE DURABLE POWR OF ATTORNEY OF CHRISTOPHER A KOSMATKA

The court approves the payment of the $3894, plus cost reimbursement of $60, incurred by guardian ad litem for professional services rendered through March 6, 2017.

  • Hearing

    Mar 15, 2017

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

KLIMAS VS KLIMAS

Defendants' motion to vacate the appointment of guardian ad litem is denied. Defendants have not established that the guardian ad litem appointed for Plaintiff Esther Joy Klimas has interests that are adverse to Plaintiff's interests in this litigation. Moreover, the Court is not persuaded that Plaintiff was required to give her consent to the appointment of a guardian ad litem.

  • Hearing

    Dec 12, 2019

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

IN THE MATTER OF RAYMOND D. KILBY

One of the principal beneficiaries of this estate is a minor who does not have counsel or a guardian ad litem. The court appoints attorney Mary Kulvinskas as guardian ad litem for minor Christian Kilby, who is directed to report back to the court within 45 days with respect to the adequacy/sufficiency of the account and any recommendation for surcharge. The clerk, the administrator with will annexed, and the guardian ad litem are directed to serve the bonding company with all further notices in this case.

  • Hearing

    Apr 05, 2017

IN THE MATTER OF RAYMOND D. KILBY

One of the principal beneficiaries of this estate is a minor who does not have counsel or a guardian ad litem. The court appoints attorney Mary Kulvinskas as guardian ad litem for minor Christian Kilby, who is directed to report back to the court within 45 days with respect to the adequacy/sufficiency of the account and any recommendation for surcharge. The clerk, the administrator with will annexed, and the guardian ad litem are directed to serve the bonding company with all further notices in this case.

  • Hearing

    Apr 05, 2017

IN THE MATTER OF RAYMOND D. KILBY

One of the principal beneficiaries of this estate is a minor who does not have counsel or a guardian ad litem. The court appoints attorney Mary Kulvinskas as guardian ad litem for minor Christian Kilby, who is directed to report back to the court within 45 days with respect to the adequacy/sufficiency of the account and any recommendation for surcharge. The clerk, the administrator with will annexed, and the guardian ad litem are directed to serve the bonding company with all further notices in this case.

  • Hearing

    Apr 05, 2017

ESTATE OF ANIY CINOGLU, BY AND THROUGH IRMA KILICARSLAN, THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE, ET AL. VS ALAIN GOZUKARA, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

The Court will hear argument as to whether a guardian ad litem must be appointed before the Court can hear the present motion and whether an application for the appointment of a guardian ad litem will be made in the appropriate department pursuant to CCP 373(c). The Court will also hear argument as to whether the hearing on the motion to quash should be continued to allow for briefing or other further consideration of this issue, and whether an OSC re the appointment of a guardian ad litem should be set.

  • Hearing

    Oct 11, 2019

IN THE MATTER OF RAYMOND D. KILBY

One of the principal beneficiaries of this estate is a minor who does not have counsel or a guardian ad litem. The court appoints attorney Mary Kulvinskas as guardian ad litem for minor Christian Kilby, who is directed to report back to the court within 45 days with respect to the adequacy/sufficiency of the account and any recommendation for surcharge. The clerk, the administrator with will annexed, and the guardian ad litem are directed to serve the bonding company with all further notices in this case.

  • Hearing

    Apr 05, 2017

ARROYO, RAFAEL VS. NODARSE, YOLANDA E.

Nodarse Guardian Ad Litem for Defendant Yolanda E. Nodarse. The Court has approved the application for appointment of a guardian ad litem filed on June 20, 2017. The Court has also signed and entered the order on the parties’ joint stipulation to appoint defendant George A. Nodarse Guardian Ad Litem for Defendant Yolanda E. Nodarse.

  • Hearing

    Aug 21, 2017

  • Judge

    Elaine Lu or Georgina Torres Rizk

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

B T ET AL VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

Motion to Remove Guardian ad Litem At this time, Plaintiff’s attorney moves for an order removing Plaintiff’s mother as her GAL in this case. Plaintiff’s attorney contends the order is necessary because Plaintiff’s mother has, in contravention of Plaintiff’s interests, refused to sign settlement documents in this case. Local Rule 2.7(b)(1)(E) requires motions for appointment of guardian ad litem to be presented to Department 90 of the LA Superior Court, Stanley Mosk Courthouse.

  • Hearing

    Sep 26, 2017

FRAIDENBURGH, RYAN V. FEHRENBACHER, GEORGE

Plaintiff also alleges he is mentally incompetent and filed the complaint several months prior to the appointment of a guardian ad litem. (Complaint ¶¶12, 15.) An incompetent person lacks the legal capacity to appear in an action absent the appointment of a guardian ad litem. (Code of Civil Procedure section 372.) For these reasons, the demurrer is sustained in its entirety.

  • Hearing

    Jan 10, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 13     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.