Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 22STCV28642, Date: 2022-12-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV28642    Hearing Date: December 27, 2022    Dept: 48

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On September 1, 2022, Plaintiff P.H. filed this action against Doe 1, arising from childhood sexual assault.

On September 26, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s ex parte application to seal the certificates of merit, permit service on Doe 1, and permit Plaintiff to proceed under a fictitious name.

On December 13, 2022, Plaintiff filed another ex parte application to seal the certificates of merit, permit service on Doe 1, and permit Plaintiff to proceed under a fictitious name.  Plaintiff also seeks leave to file an amended complaint naming Doe 1.

A.        Seal Certificates of Merit and Certificate of Corroborative Facts

A plaintiff who is 40 years of age or older in an action arising from childhood sexual assault must file a certificate of corroborative fact and certificates of merit executed by the attorney for the plaintiff and by a licensed mental health practitioner selected by the plaintiff, and the court must review them in camera.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.1, subds. (f)-(g), (i), (n).)

Because records examined in camera must be filed under seal (California Rules of Court, rule 2.585(b)) and the Court must keep all certificates of corroborative fact under seal (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.1, subd. (o)), the request to seal Plaintiff’s Certificates of Merit and Certificate of Corroborative Fact is granted.

B.        Permit Service on Defendant

Plaintiff seeks permission to serve Doe 1.  The Court previously granted permission on September 26, 2022.  Accordingly, this request is moot.

C.        Plaintiff’s Fictitious Name

On September 26, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed under a fictitious name.  Accordingly, this request is moot.

D.        Request to File Amended Complaint

A defendant must be named “Doe” in all pleadings and filings until there has been a showing of corroborative fact as to the charging allegations against that defendant.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.1, subd. (l).)  An application must include a certificate of corroborative fact executed by the plaintiff’s counsel declaring that the attorney has discovered one or more facts corroborative of one or more of the charging allegations against a defendant or defendants and setting forth the nature and substance of the corroborative fact.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.1, subd. (m).)  The court must review the application and the certificate of corroborative fact in camera.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.1, subd. (n).)  The court must order that the complaint may be amended to substitute the name of the defendant if, based solely on the certificate and any reasonable inferences to be drawn from the certificate, one or more corroborative facts of one or more of the charging allegations has been shown.  (Ibid.)

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Certificate of Corroborated Fact.  The Court cannot find that one or more corroborative facts of one or more of the charging allegations has been shown.  Counsel’s only support for the corroborative fact is Plaintiff’s declaration.

Accordingly, the request to file an amended complaint substituting the name of Doe 1 is denied without prejudice.  (See Code Civ. Proc., § 340.1, subd. (m) [application may be made at any time after the action is filed].)

E.        Conclusion

The ex parte application is GRANTED IN PART.

Plaintiff’s Certificates of Merit and Certificate of Corroborative Fact are ordered sealed.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT48@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit.  Parties intending to appear are encouraged to appear remotely and should be prepared to comply with Dept. 48’s new requirement that those attending court in person wear a surgical or N95 or KN95 mask.

         Dated this 27th day of December 2022