Judge: Christian R. Gullon, Case: 23STCV16430, Date: 2024-12-03 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV16430 Hearing Date: December 3, 2024 Dept: O
Tentative Ruling
DEMURRER OF DEFENDANTS, THE INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN
CHURCH, INC. AND CITY OF ANGELS INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH, TO PLAINTIFFS’
COMPLAINT is SUSTAINED without leave to amend; the court allowed for
supplemental briefing to address the lack of a timely opposition and the
supplemental brief does not meaningfully address the matter.
Background
This case arises out of allegations of childhood sexual
abuse. Plaintiffs SALUD GONZALEZ (“Salud”) and JOANA DIAZ (“Joana”) allege the
following against Defendants INTERNATIONAL CHURCHES OF CHRIST, INC. (“ICOC”);
THE INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH, INC. (“ICC”); CITY OF ANGELS INTERNATIONAL
CHRISTIAN CHURCH (“City of Angeles Church”); THOMAS (“KIP”) McKEAN; FERNANDO
SANCHEZ (“Sanchez”); SELINA ANN BOQUET (“Selina”); RICARDO GONZALEZ, an
individual; ALFREDO ALANIS (“Alfredo”): Beginning at the age of 4, Salud was sexually
assaulted by Sanchez, a teacher at Salud’s local ICOC Church. (See FAC p. 35.)
Even when Salud changed churches to ICC, she was sexually assaulted by Selina,
who ran the Chemical Recovery Program. (See FAC p. 36.) As for Joana, she
assaulted and molested for years by Alfredo, an ICOC and ICC member. (FAC pp.
38-42.)
On July 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed suit against Defendant
asserting the following causes of action (COAs):
1.
SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A MINOR
2.
VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE 647.6(A)(1)
3.
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
4.
NEGLIGENT HIRING, SUPERVISION, AND RETENTION
5.
NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION OF A MINOR
6.
FAILURE TO REPORT SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE IN VIOLATION OF
PENAL CODE SECTION 11165. ET SEQ. BASED ON VICARIOUS LIABILITY
7.
NEGLIGENCE
8.
SEXUAL BATTERY IN VIOLATION OF CAL. CIV. CODE § 1708.5
9.
GENDER VIOLENCE IN VIOLATION OF CAL. CIV. CODE § 52.4
On October 20, 2023, the court issued the following minute
order re: Notice of Related Case: “The Court finds that the following cases,
23STCV16430 and 23STCV24432, are related within the meaning of California Rules
of Court, rule 3.300(a). 23STCV16430 is the lead case. For good cause shown,
said cases are assigned to Judge Christian R. Gullón in
Department O at Pomona Courthouse South for all purposes.”
On January 26, 2023, Defendants the International Christian
Church, Inc. and City Of Angels International Christian Church filed a demurrer
with a motion to strike.
On February 20, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a first amended
complaint (FAC) alleging the same COAs against the same Defendants, rendering
the 1/26/23 demurrer moot.
On March 25, 2024, Defendants filed a demurrer to the FAC,
which on 4/29/24 the court continued for supplemental briefing as the
Plaintiffs’ opposition did not squarely address Defendants’ demurrer.
On June 17, 2024, the court heard the matter and took it
under submission.
On June 21, 2024, the court issued its final ruling
sustaining the demurrer and granting the MTS without leave to amend.
On July 2, 2024, Plaintiffs filed their SAC.
On August 5, 2024, Defendants filed the instant demurrer.
Discussion
The court’s 9/24/24 ruling was to sustain the demurrer
without leave to amend as the complaint was time barred, and there was lack of
an opposition to explain otherwise. However, during the hearing, Plaintiff’s
Counsel, Counsel Benjamin Cutchshaw, represented to the court that they did not receive notice
of the demurrer, i.e., that Plaintiff was not aware of the demurrer.
Defense Counsel Chadbourne explained otherwise. During the hearing, Defense
Counsel explained that on August 13, 2024, Plaintiff’s firm, Samini Block APC, responded directly to
defense counsel’s August 5, 2024 email that contained the notice of the
demurrer and the demurrer itself. Of note, Counsel Cutchshaw was copied on that
email. In the interest of fairness, the court allowed for supplemental
briefing on the specific issue of whether Plaintiff should be allowed to
file an opposition/notice of the demurrer, not that Plaintiffs may file
an opposition. (See also Supp. Reply p. 5.) This was in light of the
court’s 6/21/24 final ruling which clearly indicated that “any
future untimely filings by Plaintiffs will be stricken.” (6/21/24 Final
Ruling, italics and underline original.)
However, in its supplemental brief, Plaintiffs ignore the
court’s ruling and argue the merits of the motion. (See also Supp. Reply p.
5:21-24.) To the extent that Plaintiffs attempt to address the issue of notice
of the demurrer, Counsel Cutchshaw’s declaration mentions the demurrer was
not received for “unknown reasons.” (Cutchshaw Decl., P4.) But the demurrer was
received as acknowledged by the 8/13/24 email sent from Ashley
Hetzel from Samini Block APC to Defendant(s). Hetzel responded to Defendant(s) and
CC’d Counsel Cutchsaw and various other individuals stating that
“Please be sure to update your service list to avoid improper service”; the
additional individuals include Bobby Samini (already emailed), Benjamin
Cutchsaw, Nicole Prado (already emailed), Ashley Hetzel, and Ashely Chau.
To the extent that Plaintiffs are arguing that service was
improper, not so. The
demurrer was served on 8/5/24 by electronic service on the attorneys
listed as counsel of record in the Second Amended Complaint – Bobby
Samini and Nicole C. Prado.
Therefore, as Plaintiff’s Counsel made a representation to
the court that is shown otherwise by the emails, the court adheres to its
original tentative ruling which is to SUSTAIN the demurrer without leave to
amend.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, the demurrer is sustained without
leave to amend.