This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 03/17/2020 at 17:28:57 (UTC).

DOMINIC A NYAABA VS G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS

Case Summary

On 09/16/2019 DOMINIC A NYAABA filed a Labor - Wrongful Termination lawsuit against G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******8445

  • Filing Date:

    09/16/2019

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Labor - Wrongful Termination

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

NYAABA DOMINIC A

Defendant

G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Defendant Attorneys

CICCONE AMANDA

GIANNINOTO AMANDA

 

Court Documents

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

3/10/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

2/13/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

3/4/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal (Settlement)

1/15/2020: Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal (Settlement)

Other - (name extension) - Other - Counter Arguments Against Without Motion to Strike

12/10/2019: Other - (name extension) - Other - Counter Arguments Against Without Motion to Strike

Complaint - Amended Complaint 1st (Amended)

12/5/2019: Complaint - Amended Complaint 1st (Amended)

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike)

12/2/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike)

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

12/3/2019: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

12/3/2019: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

12/3/2019: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff's Defective Opposition and in Support of G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc.'s Demurrer to Plaintiff's Complaint

11/21/2019: Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff's Defective Opposition and in Support of G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc.'s Demurrer to Plaintiff's Complaint

Other - (name extension) - Other - Supplemental documents and facts

11/15/2019: Other - (name extension) - Other - Supplemental documents and facts

Request for Judicial Notice - Request for Judicial Notice

10/28/2019: Request for Judicial Notice - Request for Judicial Notice

Demurrer - without Motion to Strike - Demurrer - without Motion to Strike

10/28/2019: Demurrer - without Motion to Strike - Demurrer - without Motion to Strike

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

10/28/2019: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

9/16/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

9/16/2019: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

16 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/13/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause - Hearing re: Dismissal Date scheduled for 05/07/2020 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 03/13/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/10/2020
  • DocketOn the Amended Complaint (1st) filed by Dominic A Nyaaba on 12/05/2019, entered Request for Dismissal with prejudice filed by Dominic A Nyaaba as to the entire action

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/10/2020
  • DocketERROR with ROA message definition 99 on [ln 28, col 22] with Document:76615001

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/06/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Request for Dismissal Filed Not Entered: Name Extension: Filed Not Entered; As To Parties changed from G4S Secure Solutions (Defendant) to G4S Secure Solutions (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/06/2020
  • DocketERROR with ROA message definition 129 with DismissalParty:1934105 resulted in empty message

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2020
  • DocketOn the Amended Complaint (1st) filed by Dominic A Nyaaba on 12/05/2019, entered Request for Dismissal with prejudice filed by Dominic A Nyaaba

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by: Dominic A Nyaaba (Plaintiff); As to: G4S Secure Solutions (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/18/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Request for Dismissal Filed Not Entered: Name Extension: Filed Not Entered; As To Parties changed from G4S Secure Solutions (Defendant) to G4S Secure Solutions (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/18/2020
  • DocketOn the Amended Complaint (1st) filed by Dominic A Nyaaba on 12/05/2019, entered Request for Dismissal with prejudice filed by Dominic A Nyaaba

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/18/2020
  • DocketERROR with ROA message definition 129 with DismissalParty:1912195 resulted in empty message

    Read MoreRead Less
38 More Docket Entries
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketRequest to Waive Additional Court Fees (Superior Court); Filed by: Dominic A Nyaaba (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketUpdated -- Amended Complaint 1st: Status Date changed from 12/05/2019 to 09/16/2019

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketRequest to Waive Court Fees; Filed by: Dominic A Nyaaba (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketOrder on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Signed and Filed by: Clerk; As to: Dominic A Nyaaba (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Dominic A Nyaaba (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 03/15/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC08445    Hearing Date: December 02, 2019    Dept: 94

Nyaaba v. G4S Secure Solutions, et al.

DEMURRER

(CCP § 430.31, et seq.)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant G4S Secure Solutions (USA), Inc.’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED WITH 30 DAYS’ LEAVE TO AMEND.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff Dominic A. Nyaaba (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for wrongful termination, unsafe working conditions, battery, assault and unpaid wages against Defendant G4S Secure Solutions (USA), Inc. (“Defendant”) on September 16, 2019. Defendant filed the instant Demurrer on October 28, 2019. To date, no opposition has been filed.

Legal Standard

A demurrer is a pleading used to test the legal sufficiency of other pleadings. It raises issues of law, not fact, regarding the form or content of the opposing party’s pleading. It is not the function of the demurrer to challenge the truthfulness of the complaint; and for purpose of the ruling on the demurrer, all facts pleaded in the complaint are assumed to be true, however improbable they may be.

A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack; or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311.) No other extrinsic evidence can be considered (i.e., no “speaking demurrers”). A demurrer is brought under CCP § 430.10 [grounds], § 430.30 [as to any matter on its face or from which judicial notice may be taken], and § 430.50(a) [can be taken to the entire complaint or any cause of action within]. Specifically, a demurrer may be brought per CCP § 430.10(e) if insufficient facts are stated to support the cause of action asserted. Per CCP §430.10(a) a demurrer may be brought where the court has no jurisdiction of the subject of the cause of action alleged in the pleading. Furthermore, demurrer for uncertainty will be sustained only where the complaint is so bad that the defendant cannot reasonably respond. CCP § 430.10(f).

However, in construing the allegations, the court is to give effect to specific factual allegations that may modify or limit inconsistent general or conclusory allegations. (Financial Corporation of America v. Wilburn (1987) 189 Cal.App.3rd 764, 769.) And, if the facts pled in the complaint are inconsistent with facts which are incorporated by reference from exhibits attached to the complaint, the facts in the incorporated exhibits control. Further, irrespective of the name or label given to a cause of action by the plaintiff, a general demurrer must be overruled if the facts as pled in the body of the complaint state some valid claim for relief. Special demurrers are not allowed in limited jurisdiction courts. (CCP § 92(c).)

Leave to amend must be allowed where there is a reasonable possibility of successful amendment. (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 348.) The burden is on the complainant to show the Court that a pleading can be amended successfully. (Id.)

Finally, CCP section 430.41 requires that “[b]efore filing a demurrer pursuant to this chapter, the demurring party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to demurrer for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer.” (CCP § 430.41(a).) The parties are to meet and confer at least five days before the date the responsive pleading is due. (CCP § 430.41(a)(2).) Thereafter, the demurring party shall file and serve a declaration detailing their meet and confer efforts. (CCP § 430.41(a)(3).)

Discussion

The Demurrer is accompanied by a meet and confer declaration that satisfies the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41. (Demurrer, Ciccone Decl.) Defendant demurs to each cause of action for failure to allege facts sufficient to state a cause of action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10, subdivision (e).

1st Cause of Action for Wrongful Termination

A cause of action for wrongful termination by retaliation—set forth in Cal. Labor Code section 1102.5—requires Plaintiff to “show that she engaged in protected activity, that she was thereafter subjected to adverse employment action by her employer, and there was a causal link between the two.” ’ ” (Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert Hafif (2006) 39 Cal.4th 260, 287-288.) The Complaint here alleges that Plaintiff was fired for calling the police and FBI when he, or Defendant’s clients were in danger. (Compl., p. 3.) No facts are alleged as to when Plaintiff was employed by Defendant, when he was terminated, when these calls were made, or any other facts showing a causal link between the termination and phone calls.

The demurrer to the first cause of action, therefore, is sustained with leave to amend.

2nd Cause of Action for Unsafe Working Conditions

Cal. Labor Code section 6400 requires every employer to provide a “safe and healthful” workplace for its employees. (Cal. Lab. Code, § 6400, subd (a).) Plaintiff alleges that Defendant “endangered my life when I worked with dangerous drug addicts who pulled out guns” without provocation and some of his co-workers “did drugs, smoked weed, and swallowed pot. The repugnant smell and smoke” impaired Plaintiff’s health. (Compl., pp. 2:25-27, 8.) Finally, Plaintiff alleges that he was not informed he would be working in “notorious gang groups.” (Id. at p. 8.) The Demurrer does not address the allegations of drug use and working with notorious gang groups. It only contends that the allegation of work with drug addicts is insufficient the Complaint does not explain where, when or how these interactions occurred. The Court agrees that without more information about the nature of the interactions, Defendant’s responsibility for the alleged dangers is unclear. The same is true regarding Plaintiff’s alleged exposure to drugs, weed and gangs. Indeed, the Complaint does not even allege crucial background facts such as Plaintiff’s job title or description. He refers to a “PPO position” for which he was not hired, but does not explain what “PPO” stands for. Without further allegations, it is not possible to determine if Defendant violated its obligation to provide a “safe and healthful” workplace.

The demurrer to the second cause of action is sustained with leave to amend.

Third Cause of Action for Battery; Fourth Cause of Action for Assault

A battery is any intentional, unlawful (unconsented) and harmful contact by one person with the person of another. (Brown v. Ransweiler (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 516, 526.) Assault is a demonstration of an unlawful intent to inflict immediate injury on the person of another. (Lowry v. Standard Oil Co. (1944) 63 Cal.App.2d 1, 6-7.) Here, the Complaint does not allege that Defendant battered or assaulted Plaintiff. It alleges that Byran Barajas, while heavily armed with a gun, pushed Plaintiff with intent to cause serious bodily harm. (Compl., p. 4.) The Complaint, however, does not alleges that Barajas works for Credit Karma. (Id. at p. 5, ¶D.) There are no facts alleged as to why Defendant is liable for Barajas’ conduct.

The demurrer to the third and fourth causes of action is sustained with leave to amend.

Fifth Cause of Action for Unpaid Wages

The only allegation regarding wages in the Complaint is that “paycheck was not issued to me. Herman Flores shared it with his wife.” (Id. at p. 3:4-8.) No allegations are provided as to what dates Plaintiff worked, to what pay he was entitled, who was responsible for issuing paychecks. Without more information it is not possible to determine whether Defendant violated Labor Code provisions regarding payment of wages

The demurrer to the fifth cause of action is sustained with leave to amend.

Conclusion

Defendant G4S Secure Solutions (USA), Inc.’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED WITH 30 DAYS’ LEAVE TO AMEND.

Moving party to give notice.