Bal

(PC) Hollis v. Bal

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 14, 20232:13-cv-02145California2,339 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARVIN GLENN HOLLIS, No. 2:13-cv-02145-MCE-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER J. BAL, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff argues in a renewed motion for either the appointment of counsel or a guardian ad litem that he is incompetent and has been prescribed psychotropic and other mental health medication. ECF No. 192. Plaintiff claims that these medications affect his brain, memory, judgment, and cause him “to be unable to adequately represent [him]self.” Id. For the following reasons, the court denies plaintiff’s motion. Guardian ad Litem Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c)(2), courts are required to “appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect . . . [an] incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action.” A person’s capacity to sue is measured by the standard of the law of his domicile, Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(b)(1)—here, California. “In California, a…

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.