In this case, we determine whether a guardian ad litem was awarded fees for work that exceeded the scope of the authority given to him by the trial court. The trial court appointed the guardian ad litem to represent the interests of a minor-plaintiff during the resolution of a proposed settlement with one defendant in a multiple-defendant lawsuit. After the settlement was finalized, the guardian ad litem continued to represent, without court order, the minor-plaintiff’s interests in her claims against the remaining defendants. Because the guardian ad litem continued representing the minor-plaintiff’s interests without court order, we reverse the court of appeals’ judgment and render judgment that the guardian ad litem’s activities following resolution of the initial settlement are not compensable.
In 2005, Oscar Chacon suffered fatal injuries in an automobile accident. The accident allegedly occurred because a tire tread separated from the rear right tire of the 1998 Ford Explorer in which he was a passenger. Chacon’s wife, Patricia Chacon, brought a wrongful death and survival action on behalf of herself, her husband’s estate, and her minor daughter, Valerie Chacon (collectively, the Chacons).*fn1 The Chacons alleged products liability claims against Ford Motor Company and Cooper Tire & Rubber Company,*fn2 and a negligent entrustment claim against Darrel Brown, the owner of the vehicle.
Almost one year after filing their original petition, the Chacons informed the trial court that they had reached a tentative settlement with Cooper Tire. In connection with that settlement, the Chacons requested that the trial court appoint a guardian ad litem to represent Valerie’s interests. The court granted the motion and appointed G. Daniel Mena as guardian ad litem. With Mena’s approval, the settlement with Cooper Tire was finalized, and in October 2006, following a hearing to obtain court approval of the settlement, a judgment was entered that successfully resolved the Chacons’ claims against Cooper Tire. At that time, Mena submitted to the trial court an application for $11,000 in compensation for his service as guardian ad litem in connection with the Cooper Tire settlement. The trial court approved the $11,000 award and taxed it against Cooper Tire in full. Subsequently, the case was transferred to a different court to avoid potential delays resulting from the election of a new trial judge.
