Judge: Carolyn M. Caietti, Case: 37-2023-00033250-CU-MC-CTL, Date: 2024-05-03 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - May 02, 2024

05/03/2024  10:30:00 AM  C-70 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Carolyn Caietti

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Misc Complaints - Other Demurrer / Motion to Strike 37-2023-00033250-CU-MC-CTL HUBKA VS SAN DIEGO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Demurrer, 09/15/2023

Defendant San Diego Community College District's Demurrer to Amended Complaint is OVERRULED.

As a preliminary matter, the Court notes both the Court and Plaintiff's Counsel are members of the Wallace Inn of Court (IOC). The Court discloses this information but will not recuse. The Court has no on going relationship with Plaintiff's Counsel beyond the meetings this IOC holds as many other Inns do in our local legal community. This will not interfere with the Court's ability to be fair and impartial.

Defendant's request for judicial notice is granted and notice will be taken to the extent permitted. The Court declines to make any determinations with respect to what rights or obligations arise under the agreement. (Bonner v. County of San Diego (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1336, 1342, fn. 3.) A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack; or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318; Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) The complaint must be liberally construed and given a reasonable interpretation, with a view to substantial justice between the parties. (Amarel v. Connell (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 137, 140–141; see also, Poseidon Development, Inc. v. Woodland Lane Estates, LLC (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 1106, 1111-12 [in ruling on demurrers, courts treat as being true 'not only the complaint's material factual allegations, but also facts that may be implied or inferred from those expressly alleged'].) For purposes of demurrer only and in liberally construing the facts alleged and assuming their truth, Plaintiffs exhausted their administrative remedies. (AC, at ¶ 13.) Defendant's factual contentions they did not is based on extrinsic evidence. Further, Plaintiffs dispute the accuracy of the agreement proffered by Defendant because, as they maintain, it is not the complete agreement governing the case. Section 15.15 of the collective bargaining agreement indicates there may be other agreements as it states, '[i]t is the intent of the parties to reach agreement on a change to sworn officers with the P.O.A...' As indicated above, the Court declines to make any determinations with respect to what rights or obligations arise from the agreement. (Bonner, supra.) Defendant's reliance on Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs v. County of Los Angeles (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 918 is misplaced. There, the trial court sustained the county's demurrer on the ground the union did not exhaust administrative remedies available under a labor agreement before filing suit. The appellate court reversed, finding the union was not exempt from the exhaustion of administrative remedies requirement absent an exception but that individual administrative remedies for the union's Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3020222  46 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  HUBKA VS SAN DIEGO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT  37-2023-00033250-CU-MC-CTL members were inadequate for class claims and were, therefore, not required. (Id., at p. 928-934.) Similarly here, Plaintiffs filed this action on behalf of themselves and all other affected police officers employed and formerly employed by Defendant. Defendant does not address how the grievance procedure is adequate for class claims.

The Amended Complaint sufficiently states facts to constitute a claim for declaratory relief. (C.C.P., § 1060 [any person who 'desires a declaration of his or her rights or duties with respect to another...may, in cases of actual controversy relating to the legal rights and duties of the respective parties, bring an original action ... in the superior court for a declaration of his or her rights ... including a determination of any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument or contract....'].) As alleged, an actual controversy of whether Defendant must comply with the agreements it made with its police officers' bargaining units and whether federal law permits Defendant to recoup overpayments to the police officers. (AC, at ¶¶ 6-9, 15.) The Amended Complaint is not uncertain. Demurrers for uncertainty are disfavored and these allegations do not make it so Defendant cannot reasonably respond, adequately assert affirmative defenses or know what to ask in discovery. (Lickiss v. Financial Indus. Regulatory Auth. (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 1125, 1135.) Concluding Orders For these reasons, the demurrer is OVERRULED.

Defendant is ordered to: (i) file and serve an answer by May 17, 2024; and (ii) serve written notice of this ruling on all appearing parties by May 7, 2024, if the tentative ruling is confirmed without modification.

Plaintiff is reminded to comply with Department 70's Policies and Procedures and to provide courtesy copies of motion briefing.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3020222  46