Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 22STCV31569, Date: 2024-06-18 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV31569 Hearing Date: June 18, 2024 Dept: 27
Demurrer
Hearing Date: 6/18/24
CASE NO./NAME: 22STCV31569 ERIC SMITH vs LOS ANGELES POLICE
DEPARTMENT
Moving Party: Defendant City of Los Angeles
Responding Party: Plaintiff
Notice: Sufficient
Ruling: Demurrer is OVERRULED
Legal Standards¿
A demurrer for sufficiency tests whether the
complaint states a cause of action. (Hahn v. Mirda (2007) 147
Cal.App.4th 740, 747.) When considering demurrers, courts read the allegations
liberally and in context. In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be
apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice. (Donabedian
v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) “A demurrer tests the
pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters. Therefore, it
lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are
judicially noticed (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 430.30, 430.70). The only issue
involved in a demurrer hearing is whether the complaint, as it stands,
unconnected with extraneous matters, states a cause of action. [Citation.]” Hahn,
supra, 147 Cal.App.4th at p. 747, citing SKF Farms v. Superior Court
(1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 902, 905.)¿
Government Claims Act
Under the Government Claims Act,
the general rule is that any party with a claim for money or damages against a
public entity must first file a claim directly with that entity; only if that
claim is denied or rejected may the claimant file a lawsuit. (Gov’t Code §§
905, 945.4; City of Ontario v. Superior Court (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th
894.)¿ This provides the public entity with an opportunity to evaluate
the claim and make a determination as to whether it will pay on the claim.¿ (Roberts v. County of Los
Angeles (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 474.)¿ Failure to timely file a tort
claim renders the complaint subject to demurrer.¿ ¿(V.C. v. Los Angeles Unified
School Dist.¿(2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 499, 509—affirming trial court decision to
sustain demurrer without leave to amend on the ground that V.C.'s failure to
timely comply with the requirements of the Tort Claims Act barred her action.)¿
¿
Where a public entity provides
written notice that a claim has been rejected, the claimant has six months from
the date the notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file
suit.¿ (Gov’t Code § 945.6(a)(1).)¿¿¿
Analysis
The operative complaint states that Plaintiff
filed a complaint that satisfied the statutory requirements under the
Government Claims Act. (Complaint ¶ 28.) Although Defendant submitted several
declarations, it presented nothing by way of judicial notice. In a demurrer
proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via
proper judicial notice. (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116
Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) “A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the
evidence or other extrinsic matters. Therefore, it lies only where the defects
appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed." (Code Civ.
Proc., §§ 430.30, 430.70.) Defendant contends that Plaintiff's complaint with
the Los Angeles Police Department does not constitute a demand letter and fails
to meet statutory requirements. This argument is directly contradicted by
Plaintiff's assertion in the complaint that the document sent to the City of
Los Angeles met the necessary statutory requirements. (Complaint ¶ 28.)
Moreover, Exhibit A attached to the complaint
is not the demand itself, but rather the Los Angeles Police Department’s
response to Plaintiff's submission. Consequently, the Court is unable to
determine whether the demand actually complied with the statutory requirements
based on the provided documentation. Without documents by judicial notice or
documents attached to the complaint showing otherwise, all the Court has to
rely on is Plaintiff’s allegation that he has complied with the statutory
requirements under the Government Claims Act, which for purposes of a demurrer
is assumed to be true. Thus, the present demurrer is OVERRULED.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:
If a party intends to submit on
this tentative ruling,¿the party must send an email to the court at¿sscdept27@lacourt.org¿with the Subject line “SUBMIT”
followed by the case number.¿The body of the email must include the hearing date and
time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.
Unless¿all¿parties submit by email to this
tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or
in person for oral argument.¿You should assume that others may appear at the hearing
to argue.
If the parties neither submit nor
appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the
tentative ruling as the order of the Court.¿ After the Court has issued a
tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion
without leave.