Judge: Matthew C. Braner, Case: 37-2023-00007819-CU-WM-CTL, Date: 2023-10-20 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - October 19, 2023

10/20/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-60 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Matthew C. Braner

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Writ of Mandate Demurrer / Motion to Strike 37-2023-00007819-CU-WM-CTL HERRON VS SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Respondents San Diego Unified Port District ('SDUPD') and Coronado Yacht Club's demurrer is SUSTAINED.

Respondents' request for judicial notice is granted. The court will disregard the 'evidence' submitted by Petitioner Matthew Herron as outside the pleadings and not subject to judicial notice.

A demurrer shall be sustained if the pleading 'does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.' (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) To test the sufficiency of a cause of action, the court treats as true 'all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law.' (Centinela Freeman Emergency Medical Associates v. Health Net of California, Inc. (2016) 1 Cal.5th 994, 1010.) The court may also consider matters that have been judicially noticed. (Id.) The court shall give the complaint a 'reasonable interpretation, reading it as a whole and its parts in their context.' (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) First, the court agrees with Respondent that the petition for writ of mandate filed by Petitioner sounds in traditional mandamus under Code of Civil Procedure section 1085, and not administrative mandamus under section 1094.5. The court also agrees that Petitioner cannot, as a matter of law, bring an action for administrative mandamus in connection with the lease at issue because the lease became final on January 1, 2019, and actions for administrative mandamus must be filed 'not later than the 90th day following the date on which the decision becomes final.' (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.6, subd. (b).) Second, actions for traditional mandamus entail two basic requirements: '(1) A clear, present and usually ministerial duty upon the part of the respondent [citations]; and (2) a clear, present and beneficial right in the petitioner to the performance of that duty [citation].' (People ex rel. Younger v. County of El Dorado (1971) 5 Cal.3d 480, 391.) Here, Petitioner's claim for traditional mandamus is founded on application of the Public Trust Doctrine, which 'necessarily involves the exercise of discretion by state agencies.' (Monterey Coastkeeper v. Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (2022) 76 Cal.App.5th 1, 21.) More importantly, '[t]his inherently discretionary doctrine generally does not allow for intervention by the courts other than in the context of judicial review of administrative decisions.' (Id at pp. 21-22; see also Center for Biological Diversity, Inc. v. FPL Group, Inc. (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 1349, 1371 ['Intervention by the courts, other than by exercising oversight over the administrative process and ensuring that proper standards are applied, not only would threaten duplication of effort and inconsistency of results, but would require the courts to perform an ongoing regulatory role as technology evolves and conditions change. All of these factors call for abstention.'].) Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3011969  9 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  HERRON VS SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT [IMAGED]  37-2023-00007819-CU-WM-CTL Given the above authorities, Petitioner cannot state a claim for either traditional or administrative mandamus in connection with Respondent SDUPD's discretionary decision to lease the lands in question to Respondent Coronado Yacht Club. As such, Respondents' demurrer is sustained without leave to amend.

The minute order is the order of the court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3011969  9