Suleman Case—Guardian Ad Litem Appointment Reversed and Superior Court Judge Allows Petersen Suit to Continue.
On May 9, 2009, we reported on an action filed by child rights activist Paul Petersen, who had an objective to get a guardian appointed for the octuplets of Nadya Suleman. We have some updates for you on this case.
The Fourth District, Division 3, in a 3-0 unpublished decision authored by Justice Fybel, issued a mandate/prohibition writ overturning the earlier appointment of a guardian ad litem to represent the octuplet minors’ interests. In Suleman v. Superior Court, Case No. G042399 (Aug. 11, 2009) (unpublished), the appellate court found that the guardian ad litem appointment was infirm because there was no admissible evidence indicating mother’s representation of the minors was inadequate (as required under Probate Code section 1003(a)(1)) and mother was not given notice of the guardian ad litem appointment request.
On August 21, 2009, Orange County Superior Court Judge Gerald Johnston rejected Ms. Suleman’s motion to dismiss the Petersen lawsuit, determining that there is no statutory requirement that a petitioner must be an “interested person” or enjoy any type of relationship with the minors named in the petition.
One of the brewing potential upshots will be attorney’s fees—if a guardian is appointed, the amount of any fees which will be awarded to the guardian’s attorneys.
If you want more details on these recent developments, see Rachanee Srisavasdi’s article, “Judge refuses to throw out octuplets guardian suit,” published in the August 22, 2009 edition of The Orange County Register.
Note: the octuplets were born January 26. They are called: Nariah, Makai, Jeremiah, Jonah, Josiah, Noah, Isaiah, and Maliah.
Choi/Great Park Action—City of Irvine Agrees to Pay $75,000 In Attorney’s Fees Incurred by Council Members Shea and Choi.
On July 1, 2009, we did a post on Choi v. Orange County Great Park, where the Fourth District, Division 3 overturned a decision refusing to award Irvine council members Shea and Choi attorney’s fees under the private attorney general statute for prevailing in a dispute over getting documents relating to the Great Park’s CEO search.
Now, we can report that the City of Irvine has agreed to cover $75,000 in attorney’s fees incurred by the council members as part of a settlement in which the members have already been allowed to inspect and copy relevant documents during a closed-door meeting. Apparently, Irvine has not revealed to the press how much it spent in defending the lawsuit.
See Sean Emery’s article, “Irvine pays $75,000 in suit over Great Park,” if you want more details. The article is published in the August 22, 2009 edition of The Orange County Register.
Fourth District, Division 3 Moves Into New Quarters.
Co-contributors Marc and Mike, as well as colleague Rob Stein, were treated to a look at sections of the new quarters of the Fourth District, Division 3 Court of Appeal. The appellate court recently relocated from its former base on Spurgeon Street to a new building located at 601 W. Santa Ana Boulevard, Santa Ana, California. The new quarters are impressive and allow consolidation of all the justices; earlier, because of space limitations, the justices were spread out over two different locations. We should like to thank the Orange County Bar’s Appellate Section for the look at the new appellate quarters. Below, co-contributor Marc shows you a picture he took while the building was under construction and a recent picture showing the completed building.
Photo of courthouse under construction. Photographer: Marc Alexander
Photo of completed courthouse. Source: court website.