Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 21STCV44757, Date: 2022-08-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV44757    Hearing Date: August 5, 2022    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: August 5, 2022

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

(2) Demurrers to First Amended Complaint & Motion to Strike

Moving Party: (1) Defendants County of Los Angeles, Sheriff Alex Villanueva, District Attorney George Gascón and Lt. John Adams; (2) Defendant Attorney General Rob Bonta

Responding Party: Plaintiff Jane Doe

T/R:     THE COUNTY DEFENDANTS’ DEMURRER IS SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

DEFENDANT BONTA’S DEMURRER IS SUSTAINED IS SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

DEFENDANTS TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at SMCdept54@lacourt.org with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

BACKGROUND

On February 2, 2022, Plaintiff Jane Doe filed the operative first amended complaint (FAC) against Defendants County of Los Angeles, Sheriff Alex Villanueva, District Attorney George Gascón, Lt. John Adams and Attorney General Bob Banta, asserting causes of action for civil rights violations, negligent supervision, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff alleges that LASD Deputy Liliana Jara forged Plaintiff’s signature on a search waiver of Plaintiff’s phone after Plaintiff reported a sexual assault to the department. Plaintiff alleges Defendants should have criminally investigated and prosecuted Jara for forgery.

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

            The County Defendants’ requests for judicial notice are GRANTED as to the existence of the documents, but not as to the truth of the matters asserted in them.

ANALYSIS

A demurrer to a complaint may be taken to the whole complaint or to any of the causes of action in it.  (CCP § 430.50(a).)  A demurrer challenges only the legal sufficiency of the complaint, not the truth of its factual allegations or the plaintiff's ability to prove those allegations.  (Picton v. Anderson Union High Sch. Dist. (1996) 50 Cal. App. 4th 726, 732.)  The court must treat as true the complaint's material factual allegations, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law.  (Id. at 732-33.)  The complaint is to be construed liberally to determine whether a cause of action has been stated.  (Id. at 733.)

A. Demurrer of Defendants County of Los Angeles, Sheriff Alex Villanueva, District Attorney George Gascón and Lt. John Adams

            The County Defendants demur to the FAC on the grounds that Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action, and the individual Defendants are immune from suit. The Court agrees that Plaintiff lacks standing.

            All the causes of action in the FAC seek redress for Defendants’ alleged failure to investigate or prosecute Jara. Plaintiff alleges her rights were violated because law enforcement personnel should be investigated and prosecuted to the same extent as private citizens. Plaintiff also alleges that Jara’s superiors violated her rights because they failed to discipline Jara.

Courts repeatedly have held that the decision to prosecute someone is within the sole authority of the executive branch; a private citizen may not compel the government to prosecute. (See e.g. Dix v. Superior Ct. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 442, 451 [“No private citizen, however personally aggrieved, may institute criminal proceedings independently (e.g., Rosato v. Superior Court (1975) 51 Cal.App.3d 190, 226), and the prosecutor's own discretion is not subject to judicial control at the behest of persons other than the accused.”])

Plaintiff cannot compel the prosecution of Jara, nor can Plaintiff properly allege that her rights were violated because Defendants did not investigate or prosecute a third party. Defendants owe no duty to Plaintiff to investigate, prosecute, or discipline Jara. They cannot violate Plaintiff’s rights by declining to do so, nor can they be subject to civil liability for the decision.

Plaintiff does not show how this fundamental problem can be cured by amendment. The County Defendants’ demurrer is SUSTAINED without leave to amend. The motion to strike is MOOT.

B. Demurrer of Defendant Attorney General Rob Bonta

Defendant Bonta demurs to the first amended complaint on the same grounds as the County Defendants. As discussed, Plaintiff does not have any enforceable right or interest in the executive branch’s decision to investigate or prosecute another person.

            Defendant Bonta’s demurrer is SUSTAINED without leave to amend.