Ramirez Fonua v. City of Hayward
- Richard Seeborg
- 3:21-cv-03644
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Ramirez Fonua v. City of Hayward, Judge Seeborg granted motions appointing Cristina Ramirez Fonua to represent two minor plaintiffs.
B.E.R. and B.H.R. were affected because Cristina Ramirez Fonua was appointed to represent their interests as guardian ad litem in the lawsuit.
What happened
Ramirez Fonua v. City of Hayward concerns requests to appoint Cristina Ramirez Fonua as guardian ad litem—a representative who protects a minor’s interests in a lawsuit—for B.E.R. and B.H.R. Both minors are plaintiffs in an action arising from their father’s death.
The court found that Ramirez Fonua was B.E.R.’s natural grandmother and legal guardian, and B.H.R.’s natural grandmother, although she did not have legal custody of B.H.R. Ramirez Fonua said she was willing to serve and had no interests adverse to either minor. The minors also had competent counsel.
The court granted both motions and appointed Ramirez Fonua as guardian ad litem for B.E.R. and B.H.R. Judge Seeborg stated that counsel must promptly notify the court if a conflict of interest later arose.
The detailed version
- Ramirez Fonua v. City of Hayward · No. 3:21-cv-03644
- Richard Seeborg
- Jan. 4, 2022
Background
Cristina Ramirez Fonua, B.E.R., and B.H.R. sued the City of Hayward and three individuals. B.E.R. and B.H.R. are minors and biological children of the decedent. The opinion states that police officers shot and killed the decedent on May 20, 2020, in Hayward, California, and that the minors, along with Ramirez Fonua, brought a wrongful-death action.
The plaintiffs previously sought appointment of guardians ad litem for the minors, but the court denied those earlier requests without prejudice because they were not filed as separate motions and lacked information about whether the minors had general guardians or other representatives. Plaintiffs then filed separate motions seeking to appoint Ramirez Fonua for both minors.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c) requires the court to protect an unrepresented minor’s interests in a lawsuit by appointing a guardian ad litem or issuing another appropriate order. A guardian ad litem is not a party; the guardian is the minor’s representative and an officer of the court. The central concern is protecting the minor’s rights, including the right to recover damages or other relief. The court must consider whether the proposed guardian and minor have conflicting interests.
Court’s analysis
Ramirez Fonua stated that she was B.E.R.’s natural grandmother and legal guardian and was willing to serve as B.E.R.’s guardian ad litem. She also stated that she was B.H.R.’s natural grandmother, was willing to serve for B.H.R., and did not have legal custody of B.H.R. The motion concerning B.H.R. stated that B.H.R. appeared to have been removed from her biological mother’s custody in 2020 and that plaintiffs had been unable to contact the biological mother.
Although Ramirez Fonua was also a party to the lawsuit, she declared that her interests were aligned with those of both minors and that she had no adverse interest. The court found that she appeared competent to serve and that no conflicting interests were shown. The court also noted that both minors were represented by competent counsel.
Disposition
The court granted the motions to appoint Ramirez Fonua as guardian ad litem for B.E.R. and B.H.R. The appointment was for purposes of prosecuting the action. The court directed counsel to promptly notify it if a conflict of interest later arose between Ramirez Fonua and either minor. The order did not decide the underlying claims arising from the decedent’s death.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.