Yeager

AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Yeager

Good Law
143 F. Supp. 3d 1042·2015 WL 6951291·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152787
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 10, 2015No. 2:13-cv-0007-KJM-DADCalifornia6,241 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Mueller, J.

ORDER

On September 14, 2015, the court held an evidentiary hearing on the question of the competency of General Charles E. “Chuck” Yeager (Ret.) to proceed in this case without representation. General Yeager and Victoria Yeager appeared without counsel at that hearing, General Yeager representing himself and Victoria Yeager representing herself. Kennedy Luvai appeared by telephone on behalf of interve-nor Parsons Behle & Latimer. For the following reasons, the court finds it must *1045 appoint a guardian ad litem to protect General Yeager’s interests in this case.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

The court summarized the procedural history of this case in previous orders. See, e.g., Order July 21, 2015, at 2-4, ECF No. 204. In short, General Yeager filed a complaint in this court in 2007, alleging AT&T Mobility LLC and others used his name to promote their products without his permission. John Zarian and Kennedy Luvai, now of Parsons Behle, represented him at trial. After the trial, the jury awarded General Yeager $135,000. He was also awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in excess of $170,000.

In January 2013, AT&T filed a complaint in interpleader in this court, depositing…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.