Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 21STCV15777, Date: 2022-09-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV15777    Hearing Date: September 8, 2022    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely (which is highly encouraged).  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

MOTION

Plaintiff Nye C. Graves sued defendant City of Los Angeles based on injuries Plaintiff alleges she sustained incident to her arrest by officers of Defendant’s police department.  Defendant demurs to Plaintiffs’ entire complaint.  Plaintiff has not filed an opposition to the demurrer.

ANALYSIS

“It is black letter law that a demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the allegations in a complaint.”  (Lewis v. Safeway, Inc. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 385, 388.)  In ruling on a demurrer, the court must “liberally construe[]” the allegations of the complaint.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 452.)  “This rule of liberal construction means that the reviewing court draws inferences favorable to the plaintiff, not the defendant.”  (Perez v. Golden Empire Transit Dist. (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 1228, 1238.)

            Here, Defendant argues Plaintiff’s complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to constitute any cause of action against Defendant as a public entity.  Specifically, Defendant asserts that the complaint fails to allege a statutory basis for Defendant’s liability.  The Court agrees.

Government Code section 815 provides that “[a] public entity is not liable for an injury, whether such injury arises out of an act or omission of the public entity or a public employee or any other person” except as provided by statute.  (Gov. Code, § 815, subdivision (a); see Hoff v. Vacaville Unified School Dist. (1998) 19 Cal.4th 925, 932.)  “[D]irect tort liability of public entities must be based on a specific statute declaring them to be liable, or at least creating some specific duty of care, and not on the general tort provisions of Civil Code section 1714. Otherwise, the general rule of immunity for public entities would be largely eroded by the routine application of general tort principles.”  (Eastburn v. Regional Fire Protection Authority (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1175, 1183.)  To state a claim against a public entity, “every fact essential to the existence of statutory liability must be pleaded with particularity, including the existence of a statutory duty.”  (Searcy v. Hemet Unified School Dist. (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 792, 802.)   

            Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that Plaintiff complains against Defendant for “unlawful arrest, assault, emotional and physical distress…for attacking [Plaintiff] during [the] arrest, and putting false charges on [Plaintiff], causing emotional and mental distress[.]”  (Complaint, pp. 1-2.)

For pleading purposes, the Court finds that Plaintiff fails to allege a statutory basis for Defendant’s liability for any cause of action per Government Code section 815.  The Court therefore sustains the demurrer.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court sustains Defendant’s demurrer to the complaint for failure to allege facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, without leave to amend.[1] 

Defendant shall provide notice of the Court’s orders and file a proof of service of such.