Judge: Eddie C. Sturgeon, Case: 37-2022-00051436-CU-PO-CTL, Date: 2023-08-11 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - August 10, 2023

08/11/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-67 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Eddie C Sturgeon

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  PI/PD/WD - Other Demurrer / Motion to Strike 37-2022-00051436-CU-PO-CTL DOE VS DEFENDANT DOE 1 SCHOOL DISTRICT [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Demurrer, 02/23/2023

Defendant Doe 1 School District's Demurrer is SUSTAINED without leave to amend as to the fifth and sixth causes of action.

A demurrer may be sustained upon defects that appear on the face of the pleading or any matter of which the court takes judicial notice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30.) Courts 'treat the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions, or conclusions of fact or law.' (Sarale v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 225, 245.) A demurrer may be sustained where the pleading 'does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Code Civ.

Proc., § 430.10(e).) Plaintiff's fifth and sixth causes of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and sexual battery must be dismissed. It is well-established that a school district may not be vicariously liable for intentional torts based on sexual misconduct. (John R. v. Oakland Unified Sch. Dist. (1989) 48 Cal.3d 438, 443; see also Alma W., supra, 123 Cal.App.3d at 140 [holding that sexual molestation was not related to a school district employee's role as a school custodian]; Steven F. Anaheim Union High Sch. (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 904, 908 ['a school district cannot be vicariously liable for a teacher's sexual misbehavior with a student . . .' and liability must be 'premised on [the school's] own direct negligence in hiring and supervising the teacher']; Ortega v. Pajaro Valley Unifed Sch. Dist. (1998) 1023, 1057 ['a teacher's sexual abuse of a child is not an act for which a school district may be held responsible'].) Plaintiff argues this is of no consequence because its theory of Defendant's liability is predicated on the conduct of Defendant's agents other than Anfanger. Essentially, Plaintiff argues that because he has alleged that multiple school employees were actually aware of Anfanger's sexual misconduct within the scope of their employment and some were retaliated against, Defendant ratified Anfanger's conduct.

But in cases of sexual misconduct against schools, there is always an allegation that someone knew and did nothing. That sort of allegation and supporting evidence will indeed be necessary to establish claims of negligent hiring or supervision, among other negligence causes of action. But Plaintiff's proposed approach would transform every single sexual misconduct case against a school or district into one where the Defendant allegedly has direct liability for the sexual misconduct itself rather than its negligence in allowing the sexual conduct to happen. Plaintiff has cited no case where its theory has been approved and the court has found none. (Cf. Garcia ex rel Marin v. Clovis Unified Sch. Dist. (E.D.

Cal. 2009) 627 F.Supp.2d 1187, 1203 [noting that plaintiff alleging similar theory cited 'no cases post-John R. that have applied ratification to hold a school district liable for the sexual misconduct of its teachers']; see also Steven F., supra, 112 Cal.App.4th at 909 ['[t]he only way a school district may be held liable [for the sexual misbehavior of a teacher] must be premised on its own direct negligence in Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2941420  15 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  DOE VS DEFENDANT DOE 1 SCHOOL DISTRICT [IMAGED]  37-2022-00051436-CU-PO-CTL hiring and supervising the teacher'] [emphasis added].) Moreover, the conduct Defendant allegedly took to ratify Anfanger's conduct is Anfanger's own retaliation against the teachers who knew of his misconduct. Anfanger cannot have ratified his own conduct. The demurrer is sustained without leave to amend as to the fifth and sixth causes of action.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2941420  15