Kaiser ActobogG
Junior Member
What is the name of your state? California
I tried to bring litigation against a government office and a corporation a few years ago, and my child was involved. I was told that she had to have a guardian ad litem represent her interests in court. I tried to be appointed as her guardian ad litem, and was told that I couldn't act as such, as I was an interested party in the court action. I never actually got one for her, and lost the case (actually I got two remands from the appellate court, but was told that I could no longer pursue it in federal court in forma pauperis, which was an interesting ruling).
I traveled to Northern California and checked out one of my father's old law suits from the early '60s. My family had been in an automobile accident, and brought suit in state court. I found in that case that my father had been appointed as my guardian ad litem, as I had also been in the car at the time of the wreck. He had been, too, and he was my biological father, the same circumstance as the one with my daughter and I. Both points of partiality, from what the court told me in my case when it disqualified me as guardian ad litem.
I think that I have a precedent from my own family that should reverse the decision of the court about my daughter and myself. This adverse decision that I got was from state court, before the case was certified and placed in federal court. But would the fact of it being in federal court change any of these circumstances?
Now, at the same time as I was trying litigation with my child, another case was in court that involved guardian ad litem appointments. A female acquaintance of mine had been killed by a city employee in the city where I live. A wrongful death lawsuit was filed against the city on behalf of her child, who was in foster care at the time of her death. I found out that the child's attorney was named as his guardian ad litem. But isn't an attorney an interested party in a civil action? If the case wins, the attorney receives financial gain, just as a co-litigant does. Wouldn't this fact make the child's lawyer just as partial in the court's eyes in this case as it said that I was in my filing? Or was my father's appointment as my guardian ad litem similar, in fact, to the lawyer's appointment as my friend's child's? And if that is the case, then why couldn't I be appointed as my child's guardian ad litem?
Are there any points of similarity in these cases? Who does get to legally be a guardian ad litem?
I tried to bring litigation against a government office and a corporation a few years ago, and my child was involved. I was told that she had to have a guardian ad litem represent her interests in court. I tried to be appointed as her guardian ad litem, and was told that I couldn't act as such, as I was an interested party in the court action. I never actually got one for her, and lost the case (actually I got two remands from the appellate court, but was told that I could no longer pursue it in federal court in forma pauperis, which was an interesting ruling).
I traveled to Northern California and checked out one of my father's old law suits from the early '60s. My family had been in an automobile accident, and brought suit in state court. I found in that case that my father had been appointed as my guardian ad litem, as I had also been in the car at the time of the wreck. He had been, too, and he was my biological father, the same circumstance as the one with my daughter and I. Both points of partiality, from what the court told me in my case when it disqualified me as guardian ad litem.
I think that I have a precedent from my own family that should reverse the decision of the court about my daughter and myself. This adverse decision that I got was from state court, before the case was certified and placed in federal court. But would the fact of it being in federal court change any of these circumstances?
Now, at the same time as I was trying litigation with my child, another case was in court that involved guardian ad litem appointments. A female acquaintance of mine had been killed by a city employee in the city where I live. A wrongful death lawsuit was filed against the city on behalf of her child, who was in foster care at the time of her death. I found out that the child's attorney was named as his guardian ad litem. But isn't an attorney an interested party in a civil action? If the case wins, the attorney receives financial gain, just as a co-litigant does. Wouldn't this fact make the child's lawyer just as partial in the court's eyes in this case as it said that I was in my filing? Or was my father's appointment as my guardian ad litem similar, in fact, to the lawyer's appointment as my friend's child's? And if that is the case, then why couldn't I be appointed as my child's guardian ad litem?
Are there any points of similarity in these cases? Who does get to legally be a guardian ad litem?
Last edited: