On 11/07/2017 RONALD F GARCIA filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against LOS ANGELES METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is ELAINE LU. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
GARCIA RONALD F
Los Angeles, CA 90081
LOS ANGELES METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
5/7/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial) of 05/07/2019
5/7/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial)
11/7/2017: Summons - on Complaint
11/7/2017: Civil Case Cover Sheet
11/7/2017: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case
11/7/2017: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of ServiceRead MoreRead Less
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury TrialRead MoreRead Less
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 09/05/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94Read MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order (Non-Jury Trial)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCertificate of Mailing for Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial) of 05/07/2019; Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketOn the Court's own motion, Non-Jury Trial scheduled for 05/07/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94 Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion was rescheduled to 09/05/2019 08:30 AMRead MoreRead Less
DocketCase reassigned to Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Department 77Read MoreRead Less
DocketComplaint; Filed by: Ronald F Garcia (Plaintiff); As to: Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketUpdated -- Summons on Complaint: Name Extension changed from on Complaint to on ComplaintRead MoreRead Less
DocketUpdated -- (Plaintiff): First Name: blank; Last Name: blank; Middle Name: blankRead MoreRead Less
DocketUpdated -- Ronald F Garcia (Plaintiff): First Name: Ronald; Last Name: Garcia; Middle Name: FRead MoreRead Less
DocketRequest to Waive Court Fees; Filed by: Ronald F Garcia (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketOrder on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Signed and Filed by: Clerk; As to: Ronald F Garcia (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Ronald F Garcia (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketCase assigned to Hon. Elaine Lu in Department 77 Stanley Mosk CourthouseRead MoreRead Less
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 05/07/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77Read MoreRead Less
DocketOrder to Show Cause - Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 11/10/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: 17STLC03276 Hearing Date: October 24, 2019 Dept: 94
(CCP § 430.31, et seq.)
Defendant Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.
SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT: Action for motor vehicle negligence.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF: Sustain demurrer to Complaint for failure to allege sufficient facts. Plaintiff did not timely file the Complaint within six months of a response to her government claim.
OPPOSITION: None filed as of October 21, 2019.
Plaintiff Ronald Frank Garcia (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for motor vehicle negligence against Defendant Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“Defendant”) on November 7, 2017. Defendant filed the instant Demurrer on September 27, 2019. To date, no opposition has been filed.
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).)
The Demurrer is accompanied by a meet and confer declaration that satisfies the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41. (Demurrer, Gamboa 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).
Defendant demurs to the entire Complaint on the grounds that it is barred by the statute of limitations. Specifically, that Plaintiff did not file this action within six months of Defendant’s denial of his government claim. Before a suit for damages may be filed against a public entity, a plaintiff must have presented a timely written claim for the damages to the public entity and the claim must have been acted upon by the board or deemed rejected. (Cal. Gov. Code, § 945.4.) The plaintiff must have presented to the public entity a claim relating to a cause of action for injury to person or to personal property not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. (Cal. Gov. Code, § 911.2.) If the plaintiff fails to present the claim within the statutory period, he or she may apply “within a reasonable time not to exceed one year after the accrual of the cause of action” to the public entity for leave to present a late claim. (Cal. Gov. Code, § 911.4.) The public entity then grants or denies leave (or denial is deemed to occur) pursuant to Cal. Government Code section 911.6. An action against a public entity must be commenced no more than six months after rejection. (Cal. Gov. Code, § 945.6, subd. (a).)
Plaintiff sent a claim regarding injuries he allegedly suffered to Defendant. (Compl., Exh. 1.) The claim was rejected on February 5, 2016. (Ibid.) Plaintiff thereafter had six months, or until August 5, 2016 to commence the instant action. The action, however, was not filed until November 7, 2017. Based on the foregoing, Defendant has demonstrated that Plaintiff’s action is time-barred by Cal. Govt. Code section 945.6, subdivision (a)(1). Defendant Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.
Moving party to give notice.