Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 19STCV31792, Date: 2023-01-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV31792    Hearing Date: January 12, 2023    Dept: C

HAMILTON v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION AND REHABILITATION

CASE NO.:  19STCV31792

HEARING:  01/12/23

#1

TENTATIVE ORDER

Petitioner BENNIE HAMILTON’s First Amended Petition for Relief from Government Code §945.4 is DENIED.

Opposing Party to give notice.

Before the Court is a Petition to be Relieved from the Government Code claims presentation requirement by Plaintiff BENNIE HAMILTON (“Plaintiff” or “Hamilton”). Plaintiff is in pro per.

Defendant CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION (“Defendant”) specially appears and opposes the Petition.  

As a prerequisite to filing a claim against a public entity, a plaintiff must substantially comply with the California Tort Claims Statute. No suit for money or damages may be brought against a public entity on a cause of action for which a claim is required to be presented until a written claim has been presented to the public entity and has been acted upon by the board, or has been deemed to have been rejected by the board. (Gov. Code §945.4.) Under Gov. Code §945.4, presentation of a timely claim is a condition precedent to the commencement of suit against the public entity.

However, if the injured party fails to file a timely claim, a written application may be made to the public entity for leave to present such claim. (Gov. Code §911.4(a).) If the public entity denies the application, Gov. Code §946.6 authorizes the injured party to petition the court for relief from claim requirements. However, “[t]he court shall relieve the petitioner from the requirements of Section 945.4 if the court finds that the application to the board under Section 9114 was made within a reasonable time not to exceed that specified in subdivision (b) of Section 911.4 and was denied or deemed denied pursuant to Section 911.6 and that one or more the following is applicable: (1) The failure to present the claim was through mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect unless the public entity establishes that it would be prejudiced in the defense of the claim if the court relives the petitioner from the requirements of Section 945.4. (2) The person who sustained the alleged injury, damage, or loss was a minor during all of the time specified in Section 911.2 for the presentation of the claim. (3) The person who sustained the alleged, injury, damage, or loss was a minor during any of the time specified in Section 911.2 for the presentation of the claim, provided the application is presented within six months of the person turning 18 years of age or a year after the claim accrues, whichever occurs first. (4) The person who sustained the alleged injury, damage, or loss was physically or mentally incapacitated during all of the time specified in Section 911.2 for the presentation of the claim and by reason of that disability failed to present a claim during that time. (5) The person who sustained the alleged injury, damage, or loss was physically or mentally incapacitated during any of the time specified in Section 911.2 for the presentation of the claim and by the reason of that disability failed to present a claim during that time, provided the application is presented within six months of the person no longer being physically or mentally incapacitated, or a year after the claim accrues, whichever occurs first. (6) The person who sustained the alleged injury, damage, or loss died before the expiration of the time specified in Section 911.2 for the presentation of the claim.” (Gov. Code §946.6(c).)

Plaintiff alleges that his application to present an untimely claim was submitted on February 2 or February 5 of 2019, and that the “board” did not respond. On September 9, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Petition to be Relieved from the Claim Presentation Requirement of Gov. Code §945.4. On November 15, 2019, Plaintiff filed the subject First Amended Petition to be Relieved of Gov. Code §945.4.

Plaintiff is seeking leave to present a late claim against two defunct entities—the California Youth Authority and the Fred C. Nelles Youth Correctional Facility related to abuse(s) he allegedly suffered while in juvenile custody at or around 1998.

Plaintiff’s Petition is DENIED.

No competent evidence has been submitted to show that Plaintiff’s failure to timely present his claim(s) were through “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect” or that he “was physically or mentally incapacitated during all of the time specified… for the presentation of the claim.” “[A] petitioner must show more than his or her failure to discover a fact until too late; the petitioner must establish that in the use of reasonable diligence he or she failed to discovery it. (Munoz v. State of California (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1767, 1784.) The alleged misconduct occurred in 1999 or earlier. Plaintiff’s Petition was unreasonably not filed until 2019—approximately 20 years later. There is no basis to relieve Plaintiff of the requirements of the Tort Claims Act.