Fisher

Fisher v. Army National Guard

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 5, 20201:20-cv-01471California815 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHANNA FISHER and J.G., a minor, by No. 1:20-cv-01471-NONE-EPG and through her guardian ad litem, 12 JOHANNA FISHER, 13 Plaintiff, ORDER APPOINTING GUARDIAN AD

LITEM

14 v. (ECF No. 10) 15 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 The Court has read and considered the ex parte Notice of Lodging Application and Order 19 Appointing Guardian Ad Litem (ECF No. 4) and the Revised Notice of Lodging Application and 20 Order Appointing Guardian Ad Litem (ECF No. 10). 21 On October 15, 2020, Plaintiffs filed an ex parte Notice of Lodging Application and Order 22 Appointing Guardian Ad Litem. (ECF No. 4). Because the initial notice did not comply with 23 Local Rule 202(c), which requires the disclosure of a Plaintiff’s attorney’s interests and certain 24 other details, the Court ordered a revised notice or motion that did comply with the rule. (ECF 25 No. 9). Plaintiffs filed an ex parte Revised Notice of Lodging Application and Order Appointing 26 Guardian Ad Litem on November 4,…

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.