Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Suleman v. Sup. Ct., No. G042509

By FindLaw Staff on January 12, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

A petition for a writ of mandate by plaintiff, commonly referred to in the media as the "Octomom", challenging the probate court's denial of her motion to dismiss a petition by an individual, a president of a nonprofit corporation, and the court's appointment of the Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) to conduct an investigation of the family's finances is granted where: 1) the probate court erred by denying plaintiff's motion to dismiss the petition; 2) the individual  seeking guardianship has no standing under Probate Code section 1510(a) as the petition seeking appointment of a guardian of the octopulets' estates should have been dismissed because he has neither pleaded ultimate facts demonstrating the plaintiff has engaged in any financial misconduct, nor alleged any other information warranting court investigation in the plaintiff's family's finances; and 3) the probate court's order for an investigation of the family's finances is vacated.     

Read Suleman v. Sup. Ct., No. G042509 [HTML]

Read Suleman v. Sup. Ct., No. G042509 [PDF]

Appellate Information

Filed January 10, 2010


Opinion by Judge Fybel

For Appellant:   Law Offices of Arthur J. LaCilento, Arthur J. LaCilento; Jeffery J. Czech & Associates and Jeffery J. Czech

For Appellee:   Deily Law Firm, John P. Deily, Cynthia V. Roehl, Michele Carmeli; Allred, Maroko & Goldberg, Gloria Allred and John S. West

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard