Third, the Court will conduct a hearing on the Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction on Friday, October 10, 2003, at 1:30 p.m., in Courtroom 15B, United States Courthouse, 801 North Florida Avenue, Tampa, Florida. At the hearing, the parties shall be prepared to address whether Robert and Mary Schindler have standing to claim a deprivation of their daughter's constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, see, e.g., Coon v. Ledbetter, 780 F. 2d 1158, 1160-61 (5th Cir. 1986)(and cases cited), and, if not, whether this Court should appoint a guardian ad litem or next friend to prosecute the claims of their daughter under Rules of Civil Procedure, in this case. See Gardner v. Parsons, 874 F. 2d 131 (3d Cir. 1989).From another website
Gardner v. Parson, 874 F. 2d 131 (3d Cir. 1989).
More recently, in Gardner by Gardner v. Parson, 874 F.2d 131 (3d Cir. 1989), and Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1989), the Courts of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the First Circuit agreed that a guardian ad litem has absolute quasi-judicial immunity for acts undertaken as guardian. In Gardner by Gardner v. Parson, supra, Patricia Levins was appointed the guardian ad litem of a retarded teenager. The grandmother later sued the guardian for § 1983 violations regarding the teenager's care. Again relying on Briscoe and Kurzawa, the court held that a guardian ad litem, as an officer of the court, was immune from civil rights liability:We would agree that a guardian should be absolutely immune when acting as an "integral part [] of the judicial process." . . . Furthermore, Supreme Court precedent in analogous cases and reasoning of the soundly decided circuit cases, discussed above, counsel the adoption of a functional approach to determining whether a guardian ad litem is absolutely immune. Under this approach, a guardian ad litem would be absolutely immune in exercising functions such as testifying in court, prosecuting custody or neglect petitions, and making reports and recommendations to the court in which the guardian acts as an actual functionary or arm of the court, not only in status or denomination but in reality. This does not exhaust the list of functions which would be absolutely immune, and each function would have to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
...Coon v. Ledbetter, 780 F.2d 1158 (5th Cir.1986) (recognizing the constitutional claim of arrestee's daughter, who suffered only emotional trauma in the defendants' assault on the family trailer home).