United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2023

(SS) Hermosillo v. Commissioner of Social Security

(SS) Hermosillo v. Commissioner of Social Security
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided December 5, 2023
(SS) Hermosillo v. Commissioner of Social Security

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA AIDA HERMOSILLO, Case No. 1:23-cv-01467-NODJ-SAB Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION 13 APPOINTING AIDA HERMOSILLO AS v. GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR PLAINTIFF 14 V.M.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 15 (ECF No. 3) Defendant.

17 Aida Hermosillo, on behalf of minor Plaintiff, V.M., filed a complaint on October 12, 2023, challenging a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying an application for disability benefits. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee in this action and instead filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 2.)

21 On October 16, 2023, the Court denied the application without prejudice and ordered Plaintiff to file a long form application. (ECF No. 4.) On November 3, 2023, Plaintiff filed a long form application. (ECF No. 5.) Finding Plaintiff failed to provide the Court with complete and accurate information regarding her household income and expenses, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a revised long form application on November 6, 2023. (ECF No. 6.) On November 22, 2023, Plaintiff filed a revised long form application. (ECF No. 9.) On November 27, 2023, the Court issued findings and recommendations recommending that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied. (ECF No. 11.) On December 1, 2023, Plaintiff paid the filing fee.

1 Based on the payment of the filing fee, on December 4, 2023, the Court withdrew the pending findings and recommendations and directed the Clerk of the Court to issue a summons and new case documents in this action, and to serve the complaint. (ECF No. 14.)

4 Now that the filing fee has been paid, the Court considers the petition to appoint Aida Hermosillo (“Petitioner”) as guardian ad litem for minor Plaintiff V.M. that was filed concurrently with the complaint. (ECF No. 3.)

7 Pursuant to Rule 17 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a representative of a minor or incompetent person may sue or defend on the minor or incompetent person’s behalf. Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c). This requires the Court to take whatever measures it deems appropriate to protect the interests of the individual during the litigation. U.S. v. 30.64 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in Klickitat Cty., State of Wash., 795 F.2d 796, 805 (9th Cir. 1986). The appointment of the guardian ad litem is more than a mere formality. Id. “A guardian ad litem is authorized to act on behalf of his ward and may make all appropriate decisions in the course of specific litigation.” Id. A guardian ad litem need not possess any special qualifications, but he must “be truly dedicated to the best interests of the person on whose behalf he seeks to litigate.” AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Yeager, 143 F. Supp. 3d 1042, 1054 (E.D. Cal. 2015). This means that the guardian ad litem cannot face an impermissible conflict of interest with the ward and courts consider the candidate’s “experience, objectivity, and expertise” or previous relationship with the ward. Id. (citations omitted).

20 “[W]hen a parent brings an action on behalf of a child, and it is evident that the interests of each are the same, no need exists for someone other than the parent to represent the child’s interests under Rule 17(c).” Gonzalez v. Reno, 86 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1185 (S.D. Fla.), aff’d, 212 23 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2000). While a parent is generally appointed as a guardian ad litem, there are situations where the best interests of the minor and the interests of the parent conflict.

25 Anthem Life Ins. Co. v. Olguin, No. 1:06-cv-01165 AWI NEW (TAG), 2007 WL 1390672, at *2 (E.D. Cal. May 9, 2007). Therefore, a parent is not entitled as a matter of right to act as guardian ad litem for the child. Id., at *2.

1 | litem for V.M., and finds that no conflict that would preclude her serving as a guardian ad litem.

2 |(ECF No. 3.) The filing indicates V.M. is the child of Aida Hermosillo, and that Aida | Hermosillo is a competent and responsible person that is willing to act as guardian and is familiar | with the medical conditions of V.M.

5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Aida Hermosillo is appointed guardian ad | litem for minor V.M.

8 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAA (e_ | Dated: _December 5, 2023 _ ef 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.