Judge: Joel R Wohlfeil, Case: 37-2023-00024369-CU-PO-CTL, Date: 2023-11-22 Tentative Ruling
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
DEPT.:
EVENT DATE:
EVENT TIME:
HALL OF JUSTICE
TENTATIVE RULINGS - November 21, 2023
11/22/2023 09:00:00 AM C-73 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
JUDICIAL OFFICER:Joel R. Wohlfeil
CASE NO.:
CASE CATEGORY:
EVENT TYPE:
CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:
Civil - Unlimited PI/PD/WD - Other Demurrer / Motion to Strike 37-2023-00024369-CU-PO-CTL QUEST VS DOE [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Demurrer, 10/18/2023
The special and general Demurrer (ROA # 33, 50) of Defendants San Diego Police Department ('SDPD') and City of San Diego ('City') to the First Amended Complaint ('FAC') by Plaintiff ALEXANDER QUEST ('Plaintiff'), is OVERRULED.
Defendants are ordered to file and serve their answers within twenty (20) days of this hearing.
Initial Procedural Issue: Amended Pleading The Notice of Motion asserts a special and general Demurrer as against the 'Complaint.' However, prior to the filing date of this Motion, a First Amended Complaint ('FAC') was filed. As the opposition does not raise this issue, this appears to be a typographical error. The Court will apply this Demurrer to the FAC.
Special Demurrer A special Demurrer for uncertainty will be sustained where the pleading is fatally ambiguous or unintelligible. Code Civ. Proc. 430.10(f).
In this case, detailed facts are set forth within the preliminary allegations. Although the FAC is somewhat confusing, it is not fatally ambiguous or unintelligible.
The special Demurrer to each cause of action is overruled on this basis.
General Demurrer: 3rd COA for BATTERY As alleged, a battery was committed in the course of Plaintiff's arrest and temporary detention by police officers. This Demurrer lists the elements of this claim and argues: 'Further, Plaintiff fails to allege any specific facts to support any of the elements of a cause of action for simple battery or battery by a peace officer .... ¶ ... Based on the above, the City's Demurrer must be sustained.' This is the sum total of Defendants' argument.
The first part of Defendants' argument is not persuasive because no legal authority is provided supporting the contention that 'specific facts' must be alleged.
Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS
3043991 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE: QUEST VS DOE [IMAGED] 37-2023-00024369-CU-PO-CTL Generally, less particularity is required through 'ultimate fact' pleading. See Edmon & Karnow, Cal. Prac. Guide: Civ. Pro. Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2023) at ¶¶ 6:123-6:125.
Because one of the purposes of a Complaint is to apprise Defendant of the basis on which Plaintiff seeks recovery, the Complaint should set forth the ultimate facts constituting the cause of action and need not set forth the evidence by which Plaintiff proposes to prove those facts. Prue v. Brady Co./San Diego, Inc. (2015) 242 Cal. App. 4th 1367, 1376.
Accordingly, a Complaint is adequate so long as it apprises Defendant of the factual basis for the claim.
Id.
In addition, although the FAC is somewhat confusing, it alleges ultimate facts supporting each element of this cause of action. The facts alleged sufficiently apprise Defendants of the claim asserted against them. Whether the force used to arrest Plaintiff was 'unreasonable' is a question of fact that cannot be determined via this demurrer motion.
The general Demurrer is overruled on this basis.
General Demurrer: 4th COA for FALSE IMPRISONMENT Although the FAC is somewhat confusing, it alleges ultimate facts supporting each element of this cause of action. The facts alleged sufficiently apprise Defendants of the claim asserted against them.
The general Demurrer is overruled on this basis.
General Demurrer: 5th COA for INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS Although the FAC is somewhat confusing, it alleges ultimate facts supporting each element of this cause of action. The facts alleged sufficiently apprise Defendants of the claim asserted against them. Whether Plaintiff suffered 'severe' emotional distress is a question of fact that cannot be determined via this Demurrer. Also, Plaintiff sufficiently alleges he was the victim of a crime such that his detention while handcuffed in the police car is 'outrageous conduct.' The general Demurrer is overruled on this basis.
General Demurrer: 6th COA for NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS / General Demurrer: 7th COA for NEGLIGENCE Negligence is a common law form of liability that cannot be asserted against a public entity. See Gov. Code 815.
On the other hand: 'A public entity is liable for injury proximately caused by an act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the scope of his employment if the act or omission would, apart from this section, have given rise to a cause of action against that employee or his personal representative.' Gov. Code 815.2(a).
A public employee is liable for injury caused by their act or omission to the same extent as a private person. Gov. Code 820.
Section 815.2(a) makes a public entity vicariously liable for its employee's negligent acts or omissions within the scope of employment. Eastburn v. Regional Fire Protection Authority (2003) 31 Cal. 4th 1175, 1180.
In this case, sufficient facts are alleged setting forth the negligent conduct of the police officers. It is also sufficiently alleged that these police officers are employed by the City, and that they were acting within Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS
3043991 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE: QUEST VS DOE [IMAGED] 37-2023-00024369-CU-PO-CTL the course and scope of their employment.
As a result, the City could be vicariously liable for their conduct and the Demurrer is overruled on this basis.
General Demurrer: REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Injunctive relief is a remedy and not a cause of action. Camp v. Board of Supervisors (1981) 123 Cal. App. 3d 334, 356.
A cause of action must exist before injunctive relief may be granted. Id. This section of the FAC appears to request a remedy and is not a standalone cause of action. It is not separately numbered or listed within the caption of the pleading.
As a result, this aspect of the FAC cannot be challenged via a Demurrer and a motion to strike has not been filed. Thus, this aspect of the Demurrer is not persuasive.
Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS
3043991