This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 05/25/2019 at 03:37:54 (UTC).

JAYVION WASHINGTON VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Case Summary

On 07/21/2017 JAYVION WASHINGTON 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 BENNY C. OSORIO and STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9627

  • Filing Date:

    07/21/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

BENNY C. OSORIO

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

 

Party Details

Defendants and Respondents

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

DOES 1 TO 20

Guardian Ad Litem

MILES STEPHANIE

Minor

WASHINGTON JAYVION

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

HOLMQUIST DAVID ESQ.

AGUILAR PAUL A.

HUNT JAMES A. ASST. GENERAL COUNSEL

Minor Attorney

IWUCHUKU DONALD ESQ.

Other Attorneys

AKUDINOBI EMMANUEL CHUKWUEMEK

 

Court Documents

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE

2/13/2018: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE

Answer

3/20/2018: Answer

Motion to Compel Discovery

8/15/2018: Motion to Compel Discovery

DEFENDANT LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT'S NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S NONOPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE

9/12/2018: DEFENDANT LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT'S NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S NONOPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE

Unknown

9/12/2018: Unknown

Minute Order

9/14/2018: Minute Order

ORDER RE:DEFENDANTS MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTS

9/14/2018: ORDER RE:DEFENDANTS MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTS

Notice of Ruling

9/17/2018: Notice of Ruling

Minute Order

5/10/2019: Minute Order

Notice

5/13/2019: Notice

Stipulation to Continue Trial/FSC [and Related Motion/Discovery Dates] Personal Injury Courts Only (Department 91, 92, 93, 97)

5/14/2019: Stipulation to Continue Trial/FSC [and Related Motion/Discovery Dates] Personal Injury Courts Only (Department 91, 92, 93, 97)

ORDER RE: DEMURRER

1/23/2018: ORDER RE: DEMURRER

NOTICE OF RULING RE DEFENDANT'S DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

1/24/2018: NOTICE OF RULING RE DEFENDANT'S DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

10/16/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

DECLARATION OF CHRISTINE N. WOOD RE: INABILITY TO MEET AND CONFER BEFORE FILING A DEMURRER TO THE COMPLAINT AND AUTOMATIC 30-DAY EXTENSION TO RESPOND (C.C.P. ? 430.41)

11/2/2017: DECLARATION OF CHRISTINE N. WOOD RE: INABILITY TO MEET AND CONFER BEFORE FILING A DEMURRER TO THE COMPLAINT AND AUTOMATIC 30-DAY EXTENSION TO RESPOND (C.C.P. ? 430.41)

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT'S NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; ETC.

12/6/2017: LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT'S NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; ETC.

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM?CIVIL

7/24/2017: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM?CIVIL

SUMMONS

7/26/2017: SUMMONS

15 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/22/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/14/2019
  • [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by Stephanie Miles (Legacy Party); Jayvion Washington (Legacy Party); Los Angeles Unified School District (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2019
  • Notice (Notice of Continued Final Status Conference); Filed by Los Angeles Unified School District (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/10/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/10/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/26/2019
  • Notice (NOTICE OF ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL); Filed by Stephanie Miles (Legacy Party); Jayvion Washington (Legacy Party)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/06/2019
  • at 1:30 PM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/04/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/21/2018
  • at 1:30 PM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Leave to Amend

    Read MoreRead Less
37 More Docket Entries
  • 09/22/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2017
  • Summons; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2017
  • Ord Apptng Guardian Ad Litem; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2017
  • Summons Issued; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/24/2017
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/24/2017
  • Application ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/21/2017
  • COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/21/2017
  • ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/21/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC669627    Hearing Date: November 21, 2019    Dept: 5

 

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 5

jayvion washington,

Plaintiff,

v.

los angeles unified school district,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC669627

Hearing Date: November 21, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

demurrer to first amended complaint

motion to strike portions of first amended complaint

Background

Plaintiff Jayvion Washington (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Los Angeles Unified School District (“Defendant”) after he collided with a metal pole during recess. Defendant demurs to the second cause of action in Plaintiff’s first amended complaint. The demurrer is overruled. Defendant moves to strike portions of the first amended complaint. The motion is denied.

Legal Standard

“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.)

Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading, may serve and file a motion to strike the whole pleading or any part thereof.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b)(1); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1322, subd. (b).)  On a motion to strike, the court may: (1) strike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading; or (2) strike out all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of California, a court rule, or an order of the court.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 436, subd. (a)-(b); Stafford v. Shultz (1954) 42 Cal.2d 767, 782.)

Discussion

Plaintiff’s second cause of action is for negligence per se based on Government Code section 815.6 and California Code of Regulations, title 5, section 5552. “Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed by an enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the public entity is liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to discharge the duty unless the public entity establishes that it exercised reasonable diligence to discharge the duty.” (Gov. Code, § 815.6.) Under California Code of Regulations, title 5, section 5552, “Where playground supervision is not otherwise provided, the principal of each school shall provide for the supervision by certificated employees of the conduct and safety, and for the direction of the play, of the pupils of the school who are on the school grounds during recess and other intermissions and before and after school.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 5552.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to provide supervision during recess, which caused Plaintiff’s injuries. (First Amended Complaint, ¶ 16.)

Defendant argues that Plaintiff cannot assert a cause of action for “negligence per se.” While Plaintiff captions the second cause of action as for negligence per se, Plaintiff clearly intended the cause of action to be under Government Code section 815.6. Plaintiff’s allegations are sufficient to support a claim under that section. The Court therefore must overrule the demurrer. (See Sheehan v. San Francisco 49ers, Ltd. (2009) 45 Cal.4th 992, 998.)

Defendant moves to strike Plaintiff’s allegation that Plaintiff was “exposed to dangerous objects” at the playground, and the allegation that “Plaintiff collided with a rusty metal pole . . . .” (Notice of Motion to Strike, at p. 2.) A motion to strike cannot be used as a “‘line item veto’ for the civil defendant . . . .”  (PH II, Inc. v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1680, 1683.) While, as Defendant points out, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend to assert a dangerous condition of public property claim in its order of July 29, 2019, these facts are pertinent nevertheless to Plaintiff’s claim that he sustained injuries because of Defendant’s failure to properly supervise him. The motion to strike is therefore denied.

Conclusion and Order

Defendant’s demurrer to Plaintiff’s first amended complaint is overruled. Defendant’s motion to strike portions of Plaintiff’s first amended complaint is denied. Defendant shall file an answer within twenty (20) days. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: November 21, 2019 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court