On 04/25/2017 JANE DOE filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are SHIRLEY K. WATKINS and DENNIS J. LANDIN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
SHIRLEY K. WATKINS
DENNIS J. LANDIN
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
DOES 1 TO 60
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT A PUBLIC ENTITY
LOS ANGELES POLIC DEPT. CUSTODIAN OF RECO
LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS
RING DAVID M. ESQ.
RING DAVID MCDONALD
GUTIERREZ PRECIADO & HOUSE LLP
PERLMUTTER BEN H.
FEUER MICHAEL NELSON ATTORNEY FOR NON-PARTY WITNESS
6/15/2018: DEFENDANT'S DECLARATIONS AND EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES
6/15/2018: DEFENDANT'S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS
7/11/2018: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION COMPELLING COMPLIANCE WITH A SUBPOENA AND FOR A COURT ORDER RELEASING POLICE REPORTS AND EVIDENCE FROM THE CRIMINAL CASE INVOLVING THE VICTIM PLAINTIFF JANE DOE AND DEFENDA
7/20/2018: NON PARTY LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENTS RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO COMPEL;AND ETC.
8/22/2018: Minute Order
10/2/2018: Minute Order
10/19/2018: Minute Order
10/26/2018: Notice of Lodging
1/28/2019: Request for Judicial Notice
1/28/2019: Motion for Summary Judgment
3/25/2019: Stipulation and Order
5/1/2019: Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore
5/1/2019: Minute Order
11/1/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS
10/30/2017: DEFENDANT LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT'S AMENDED ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
at 08:30 AM in Department T, Shirley K. Watkins, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by CourtRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department T, Shirley K. Watkins, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses - Held - Motion GrantedRead MoreRead Less
Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore ((Arlene F. Vaughn, CSR # 3369)); Filed by Los Angeles Unified School District, a public entity (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Order (Ruling on Submitted Matter); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses) of 05/01/2019 and a copy of the Ruling on Submitted Matter filed 5-1-2019); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Reply (REPLY RE PLAINTIFF JANE DOE MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT LAUSD TO PRODUCE ISTAR INCIDENT REPORTS); Filed by Jane Doe, a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem Nadine F. (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Opposition (Defendant LAUSD's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel); Filed by Los Angeles Unified School District, a public entity (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department T, Shirley K. Watkins, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses - Not Held - Continued - Court's MotionRead MoreRead Less
Motion to Compel (Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motion To Compel); Filed by Jane Doe, a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem Nadine F. (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Receipt; Filed by Jane Doe, a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem Nadine F. (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Ord Apptng Guardian Ad Litem; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
Ord Apptng Guardian Ad Litem (FOR JANE DOE (SAMANTHA F.)D ); Filed by Attorney for Pltf/PetnrRead MoreRead Less
Application-Miscellaneous (FOR JANE DOE(SAMANTHA F.) GUARDIAN AD LITEM ); Filed by Attorney for Pltf/PetnrRead MoreRead Less
APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM, EX PARTERead MoreRead Less
Application ; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURIES AND DAMAGES ARISING FROM CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ABUSERead MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by Jane Doe, a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem Nadine F. (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
ComplaintRead MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by Nadine F. (Legacy Party); Jane Doe, a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem Nadine F. (Plaintiff); Nadine F. (Non-Party)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC659059 Hearing Date: August 12, 2020 Dept: T
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE TENTATIVE WAS REVISED AT 3:45 P.M. ON 8/11/20
JANE DOE, etc.,
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; et. al.
CASE NO: BC659059
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:
MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
August 12, 2020
[TENTATIVE] ORDER: The Motion to Strike Portions of the First Amended Complaint is DENIED. Both parties’ requests for judicial notice are GRANTED.
Per the case law submitted by both parties, the immunity from punitive damages under GC §818 is narrow and applicable to damages whose purpose is “simply and solely punitive or exemplary.” Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transp. Authority v Sup. Ct. (2004) 123 Cal. App. 4th 261, 275; Archibald v Cty. Of San Bernardino (C.D. Cal. 2018) 2018 US Dist. LEXIS 79449, *1-2. As drafted and put into effect on January 1, 2020, CCP §340.1 makes no reference to punitive damages but authorizes the Court with discretion to award “up to treble damages.” CCP §340.1(b)(1). The statute does not reference “punitive” damages. Defendant argues that the treble damages is akin to punitive damages due to the “up to” qualifier. Although the “up to” language is seen as a hallmark of punitive damages, it is noted that the statute’s legislative history makes no reference to treble damages being a punishment. The legislative intent for treble damages was to compensate the victim. (Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice (“RJN”) Exh. 1, pg. 2, Exh. 6, pg 2; Exh. 7, pg. 2, Exh. 8, pg. 4.) Defendant also cites to the legislative history to support its contention but the citations merely show that there would be high fiscal impact upon school districts if found liable for a cover up. (Defendant’s RJN Exhs. B & C.) Nothing in the legislative history provided by Defendant shows any intent to interpret treble damages as punishment. Because the treble damages herein are not for punishment but for compensation, the immunity under GC §818 is inapplicable. The court will not strike the treble damages from the FAC.
Minority Status of Hazel
Defendant argues that the FAC fails to allege minor status of Hazel in the complaint. Plaintiff claims treble damages. Treble damages are available under CCP 340.1(b)(1) if plaintiff proves that she was sexually assaulted as a result of alleged cover up of the sexual assault of a minor. Plaintiff claims that there was cover up of defendant Garcia’s relationship with a student, Hazel. The FAC does not say that Hazel was a minor.
CCP 340.1(b)(1) In an action described in subdivision (a), a person who is sexually assaulted and proves it was as the result of a cover up may recover up to treble damages against a defendant who is found to have covered up the sexual assault of a minor, unless prohibited by another law.
The issue of whether the plaintiff can claim treble damages under CCP section 340.1 has to do with the element of proof and is properly before the court at the time of trial when the jury is instructed on the element needed to prove treble damages. Paragraph 30, however, does allege that the cover-up involved sexual assault of minors. Additionally, there is nothing which prohibits plaintiff from arguing that the cover-up of Hazel, if she was a student but no longer a minor, relates to her compensatory damages. The court cannot say as a matter of law that the inclusion of the allegations re Hazel will not be relevant to any damages claimed by the plaintiff. The court will not strike the allegations as they pertain to Hazel.
Request for judicial notice of legislative history is proper when the party identifies each separate document for which judicial notice is sought as a separate exhibit; and supports the request with a memorandum of points and authorities citing authority why each such exhibit constitutes cognizable legislative history. Kaufman & Broad Communities, Inc. v. Performance Plastering, Inc. (2005) 133 Cal. App. 4th 26, 31-38. The requests are granted.