Utah Supreme Court

Can Utah juvenile courts appoint guardians ad litem for incompetent parents? In re G.J.P. Explained

2020 UT 4
No. 20190733
February 5, 2020
Remanded

Summary

The juvenile court appointed the Office of Public Guardian (OPG) as guardian ad litem for an incompetent mother in a parental rights termination proceeding without OPG’s consent. OPG challenged the appointment through extraordinary relief, arguing the juvenile court lacked authority to appoint guardians ad litem for adults and that it exceeded discretion by appointing OPG specifically.

Analysis

In In re G.J.P., the Utah Supreme Court addressed whether juvenile courts have authority to appoint guardians ad litem for incompetent parents in termination proceedings, and whether they can compel unwilling entities to serve in that role.

Background and Facts

A mother was hospitalized in a psychiatric unit and gave birth to G.J.P., who remained in intensive care for months. DCFS sought temporary custody and filed for termination of parental rights. The juvenile court found the mother incompetent to assist in her defense and initially sought to appoint a guardian. After unsuccessful attempts to locate family members or friends willing to serve, the court appointed the Office of Public Guardian (OPG) as guardian ad litem. OPG declined the appointment, arguing it lacked statutory authority to serve as guardian ad litem and that the juvenile court exceeded its jurisdiction.

Key Legal Issues

The case presented two primary questions: (1) whether juvenile courts, as courts of limited jurisdiction, have authority to appoint guardians ad litem for incompetent adults; and (2) whether a court can compel OPG to serve as guardian ad litem without its statutory consent.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Court held that juvenile courts possess inherent authority to appoint guardians ad litem for incompetent parties in matters over which they have subject matter jurisdiction. This power exists independently of specific statutory authorization and is necessary to protect the rights of incompetent parties. The Court distinguished between general guardians (governed by probate statutes) and guardians ad litem (appointed for specific litigation). However, the Court ruled the juvenile court exceeded its discretion by appointing OPG without consent, as OPG’s statutory mandate requires it to petition for or agree to appointments in advance.

Practice Implications

This decision clarifies that Utah juvenile courts can protect incompetent parties through guardian ad litem appointments while respecting statutory limitations on specific entities. Practitioners should ensure proposed guardians consent to appointment and consider the broad pool of potential candidates, including attorneys fulfilling pro bono obligations under Rule 6.1.

Original Opinion

Link to Original Case

Case Details

Case Name

In re G.J.P.

Citation

2020 UT 4

Court

Utah Supreme Court

Case Number

No. 20190733

Date Decided

February 5, 2020

Outcome

Remanded

Holding

Juvenile courts have inherent authority to appoint guardians ad litem for incompetent parties in matters over which they have subject matter jurisdiction, but cannot compel the Office of Public Guardian to serve without its statutory consent.

Standard of Review

Questions of law reviewed for correctness; decision to appoint a specific guardian ad litem reviewed for abuse of discretion

Practice Tip

When seeking appointment of a guardian ad litem for an incompetent adult, ensure the proposed guardian consents to appointment and falls within any applicable statutory requirements governing their role.

Need Appellate Counsel?

Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Related Court Opinions

    • Utah Supreme Court

    Gamez v. Labor Commission

    May 26, 2022

    Medical panels under the Workers’ Compensation Act require only one member to specialize in the condition at issue, and panelists should be disqualified where their impartiality could reasonably be questioned rather than only upon showing actual bias.
    • Administrative Law
    • |
    • Standard of Review
    • |
    • Workers Compensation
    Read More
    • Utah Court of Appeals

    Cedar City v. McCraw

    August 14, 2025

    Defense counsel’s failure to move for a directed verdict when the prosecution failed to prove an essential element of criminal mischief—ownership of damaged property by another—constituted ineffective assistance of counsel requiring reversal.
    • Criminal Procedure
    • |
    • Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
    • |
    • Sufficiency of Evidence
    Read More
About these Decision Summaries

Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.