Judge: Douglas W. Stern, Case: 22STCV13981, Date: 2022-08-24 Tentative Ruling

Please contact Department 52 at SMCDEPT52@lacourt.org and send a copy of the email to all parties, to advise the courtroom staff if parties are submitting on the court’s tentative ruling.
Please provide the Case Name, Case Number, and party.

Case Number: 22STCV13981    Hearing Date: August 24, 2022    Dept: 52

Tentative Ruling:

Defendant Los Angeles County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl’s Demurrer and Motion to Strike

Demurrer

Defendant Los Angeles County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl demurs to the entire complaint by plaintiffs Maria Margarita Carranza and Luis H. Carranza.

The court notes that the first named plaintiff, Christopher A. Altounian, applied for a fee waiver, which was denied.  He did not timely pay the filing fee, so the complaint was voided as to him under Government Code § 68634(g).

Uncertainty

Plaintiffs’ complaint is uncertain.  A complaint is subject to a demurrer for uncertainty if it “is so incomprehensible that a defendant cannot reasonably respond.”  (A.J. Fistes Corp. v. GDL Best Contractors, Inc. (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 677, 695.)  A complaint must sufficiently apprise defendants of the claims against them.  (Ibid.)

The complaint fails to apprise defendant Kuehl of the claims against her.  It is not even clear whether plaintiffs truly name her as a defendant to any cause of action.  The complaint’s caption includes her with other defendants, and a handful of other the allegations mention her.  For example, plaintiffs allege, “Sheila Kuehl notified of theft.”  (Comp., ¶ FR-7.)  The complaint further alleges, “Board of Supervisors, L.A. County, Sheila Kuehl - Supervisor, notified of check theft.  Kuehl’s answer to plaintiff, suspicion of criminal activity but beyond the assistance of the Board of Supervisors - case closed.   Obsurd [sic] this matter be closed without resolving the issues.”  (¶ GN-1.) 

The complaint includes two forms PLD-PI-001(3) for intentional tort and fraud and two forms PLD-C-001(2) for common counts and general negligence.  Each form begins with a section for the names of the plaintiffs and defendants.  The sections for defendants include only “CA Health/Human Services, IHHS Dept. Healthcare Svcs,” and Does.  Kuehl is not included.  The complaint fails to apprise defendants Kuehl of plaintiffs’ claims against her.

Failure to Allege Sufficient Facts

The complaint also fails to allege sufficient facts for any cause of action against Kuehl.  The complaint alleges a dispute between plaintiffs and the California Health and Human Services Agency regarding the In-Home Supportive Services (IHHS) program.  Under that program, the State pays or paid Altounian to serve as an in-home caretaker for the Carranzas.  The complaint alleges the State failed to pay Altounian $17,000 it owes to him. 

Defendant Sheila Kuehl is a Supervisor of the County of Los Angeles.  Plaintiffs fail to allege any facts showing she is part of this dispute.  When liberally construed, the complaint alleges plaintiffs approached Kuehl’s office for help with their dispute with the Health and Human Services Agency, but Kuehl and her office provided no help.  Those facts fail to state any cause of action against her.

In addition, Kuehl is immune from liability as a public official.  “Except as otherwise provided by statute, a public employee is not liable for an injury resulting from his act or omission where the act or omission was the result of the exercise of the discretion vested in him, whether or not such discretion be abused.”  (Gov. Code, § 820.2.)  At most, plaintiffs allege that Kuehl failed to assist them or intervene in their dispute with the Health and Human Services Agency.  That is a discretionary act or omission.  Kuehl cannot be liable for it.

Leave to Amend

After a successful demurrer, where “there is a reasonable possibility that the defects can be cured by amendment, leave to amend must be granted.”  (Stevens v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 594, 601.)  The plaintiff bears the burden of “demonstrat[ing] how the complaint can be amended.”  (Smith v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 700, 711.)  Leave to amend should be denied where “no liability exists under substantive law.”  (Lawrence v. Bank of America (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 431, 436.)

Plaintiffs show no reasonable possibility of amending the complaint to state a cause of action against Kuehl.  They allege no tortious or actionable conduct by Kuehl.  Even if they did allege such conduct, Kuehl would be immune from liability under substantive law.   

Disposition

            Defendant Los Angeles County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl’s demurrer to plaintiffs Maria Margarita Carranza and Luis H. Carranza’s entire complaint is sustained without leave to amend.

Defendant Kuehl also moves to strike portions of plaintiffs’ complaint regarding exemplary damages.  Because the court sustained Kuehl’s demurrer without leave to amend, the motion to strike is moot.