1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 K.D., a minor, through her natural guardian No. 2:23-cv-00990-DC-CKD and mother Teylor Dillon, 12 Plaintiff, 13 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S v. REQUEST FOR AN ORDER FINDING 14 SATISFACTORY SHOWING HAS BEEN BANNER LASSEN MEDICAL CENTER, MADE PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 202(a) 15 et al., (Doc. No. 37) 16 Defendants.

17 18 On April 9, 2025, Plaintiff K.D., a minor, proceeding through her natural guardian and 19 mother Teylor Dillon, filed a request asking the court to find that appointment of a guardian ad 20 litem is not necessary based on her attorney’s presentation pursuant to Local Rule 202(a) of “a 21 showing satisfactory to the Court that no such appointment is necessary to ensure adequate 22 representation of the minor or incompetent person.” (Doc. No. 37.) Specifically, because 23 Plaintiff’s mother, Teylor Dillon, is Plaintiff K.D.’s “general guardian,” she may sue on Plaintiff 24 K.D.’s behalf under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c)(1)(A) without the need for an 25 appointment of a guardian ad litem. (Id. at 1–2); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(1)(A) (providing that a 26 “general guardian” may sue on behalf of a minor); see also Doe ex rel. Sisco v. Weed Union 27 Elementary Sch. Dist., No. 2:13-cv-01145-GEB,

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. June 12, 28 2013) (explaining that under Rule 17(c), “a parent is a guardian who may so sue”); T.H. v. 1 | O'Malley, No. 24-cv-00358-JLS-DDL,

, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2024) 2 | (noting that when a minor is represented by their custodial parent, the court need not appoint a 3 | guardian ad litem unless there is a conflict of interest between the minor and the parent). In 4 | addition, the court is satisfied by Plaintiffs attorney’s showing that no such appointment of a 5 | guardian ad litem is necessary to ensure adequate representation for Plaintiff K.D. in this action 6 | because “Teylor Dillon is not a party, is not employed by any defendant, has no ownership or 7 | other financial interest in any defendant, and has no other known conflict of interest which would 8 || prevent her from acting in the best interests of her minor child, Plaintiff K.D.” (Ud. at 2.) 9 | Plaintiff's attorney also represents that Defendants have indicated they have no objection to 10 | Teylor Dillon continuing to represent Plaintiff's interests in this case. (/d.) 11 Thus, the court finds that Plaintiff's attorney has made a satisfactory showing that no 12 || appointment of a guardian ad litem is necessary to ensure adequate representation of minor 13 | plaintiff K.D. in this action. 14 Accordingly, Plaintiff's pending request for a court order finding that a guardian ad litem 15 || need not be appointed and that Plaintiff may continue in this litigation through her general 16 | guardian, Teylor Dillon, (Doc. No. 37) is hereby GRANTED. 17 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. □ 2 | Dated: _ April 22, 2025 _ RUC Dena Coggins 21 United States District Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28