isapartneratGreeneBroillet &Wheeler,LLPandatriallawyerwhohashelpedobtainmanyverdictsandsettlementsforcasesinvolvingsexabuse,productsliability,catastrophicpersonalinjury,wrongfuldeath,businesstorts,andlegal

malpractice.Taylorreceivedthe2018Street

FighteroftheYearAwardfromthe

ConsumerAttorneysofCalifornia(CAOC).

isacertifiedappellatespecialistandapartner

atEsner,Chang&Boyer.Inadditiontohandlingallaspectsofappellatelitigation,shealsoassiststriallawyerswithdispositiveand

post-judgmentmotions.Hollyreceived

theIanHerzogAppellateLawyerof

TheYearAwardin2019fromConsumer

AttorneysAssociationofLosAngeles(CAALA).

HollyN.Boyer

• StatuteofLimitations• GovernmentClaim• ViableDefendant• YourClient

VETTINGTHECASE

STATUTEOFLIMITATIONS

• CCP 340.1• 40yearsold• 5yeardiscoversorreasonablyshoulddiscover

– (nonperp)-entitykneworhadreasontoknow,orwasotherwiseonnotice,ofanymisconductthatcreatesariskofchildhoodsexualassaultbyanemployee,volunteer,representative,oragent,orthepersonorentityfailedtotakereasonablestepsortoimplementreasonablesafeguardstoavoidactsofchildhoodsexualassault.

• 3yearRevivalWindow– Specialfilingrules

StatuteofLimitations-ifunder18

• CCP 340.16– 10yearsfromdateoflastact,attemptedact,orassaultwithintenttocommit

– 3yearsfromdiscoveryorreasonablyshoulddiscover– Notretroactive– Norevival-exceptUSC

• Ifdon’tfallunderCCP 340.16-only2years

StatuteofLimitations-Adult

GOVERNMENTCLAIM?

WHO’STHEDEFENDANT?

GovernmentEntity

• TortliabilityforGovernmententitybaseduponstatuteGovernmentCode:• 820(a)apublicemployeeisliableforinjurycausedbyhisact

oromissiontothesameextentasaprivatepersonand• 815.2(a)publicentityvicariouslyliablefortortsofan

employeeoccurringwithinthescopeofhisorheremployment.

C.A.v.WilliamS.HartUnionHighSch.Dist. (2012)53Cal.4th869

• aschooldistrictanditsemployeeshavea specialrelationship withthedistrict’spupils,arelationshiparisingfromthemandatorycharacterofschoolattendanceandthecomprehensivecontroloverstudentsexercisedbyschoolpersonnel,analogousinmanywaystotherelationshipbetweenparentsandtheirchildren.

• aschooldistrictanditsemployeeshavean“affirmativeduty”totakeallreasonablestepstoprotectitsstudents.

• Adutytosuperviseatalltimestheconductofchildrenontheschoolgrounds

• Eitheratotallackofsupervisionorineffectivesupervisionmayconstitutealackofordinarycare

SeminalCaseforSchoolLiability

• Aspecialrelationshipexistswhen“theplaintiffisparticularlyvulnerableanddependentuponthedefendantwho,correspondingly,hassomecontrolovertheplaintiff’swelfare.[citation]”Doev.UnitedStatesYouthSoccerAssn.,Inc. (2017)8Cal.App.5th1118,1129.

• “‘[A]typicalsettingfortherecognitionofaspecialrelationshipiswhere‘theplaintiffisparticularlyvulnerableanddependentuponthedefendantwho,correspondingly,hassomecontrolovertheplaintiff’swelfare.”’[Citations.]”(RegentsofUniv.ofCalifornia,4Cal.5thatp.621.)

SpecialRelationship?

• “[a]dutytocontrol,warn,orprotect maybebasedonthedefendant’srelationshipwith‘either thepersonwhoseconductneedstobecontrolledor [with]...theforeseeablevictimofthatconduct.’”(RegentsofUniv.ofCalif.,supra, 4Cal.5thatp.619-620(emphasisadded).)

• Notingthatalthoughthecollegestudentswerenotminors,butthattheywerevulnerable,thisCourtconcluded:“Consideringtheuniquefeaturesofthecollegiateenvironment,weholdthatuniversitieshaveaspecialrelationshipwiththeirstudents andadutytoprotectthemfromforeseeableviolence duringcurricularactivities.”(Id.atp.613.)

SpecialRelationship-College

• “Generally,agreaterdegreeofcareisowedtochildrenbecauseoftheirlackofcapacitytoappreciaterisksandavoiddanger.”“Basedonthevulnerabilityofchildrenandtheinsidiousmethodsofsexualoffenders,thecourtinJuarez heldthattherewasaspecialrelationshipbetweentheScoutsandtheplaintiff.”(Doev.UnitedStatesYouthSoccer (2017)8Cal.App.5th1118at1129)

• USYouthSoccerAssociationwasinaspecialrelationshipwithyouthathletessuchthattheycouldhaverequiredlocalorganizationstoconductcriminalbackgroundchecksofcoachesandwarnedoreducatedplayersandparentsoftherisksofsexualabuse(UnitedStatesYouthSoccer,8Cal.App.5thatp.1129),

SpecialRelationship-YouthOrganization

BROWNV.USATAEKWONDO

• AllFormsofNegligence– Specialduty

• CivilCodeSections• MandatoryReporting• FalseImprisonment• TrebleDamages

WhattoPlead?

NEGLIGENTHIRING,SUPERVISION,RETENTIONVS.

NEGLIGENCE

• PersoninaSUPERVISORIALPOSITION overactorhadpriorknowledge

• SchooldistrictmaybevicariouslyliableunderGovCode815.2forthenegligenceofadministratorsorsupervisors inhiring,supervising,andretaining….CAv.WilliamHart

NegligentHiring,Supervision,Retention

Negligence

• Dutyrunstothestudent• Vicariousliabilityforanyemployee’snegligence– Firstgradeteacherseesthirdgradeteachertakestudentintoclassroomandshutthedoor

– Secondgradeteacheronyarddutyknewtherewasanalcovethatstudentshidin,andshewasrequiredtocheckitever15minutes,andshedidn’t

– Teacherfailedtoreportsuspectedchildabusepenalcode11166

NegligenceAsOneCOAIndeed,“[i]tiserrorforatrialcourttosustainademurrerwhentheplaintiffhasstatedacauseofactionunder anypossibletheory.”(Aubry v.Tri-CityHosp.Dist. (1992)2Cal.4th962,966.)Thus,solongasthenegligenceclaimstatesacauseofactionundersometheoryofnegligence,thedemurrermustbeoverruled.Ademurrercannot piecemealdismisscertainaspectsofasinglecauseofaction.(Danielsv.SelectPortfolioServicing,Inc. (2016)246Cal.App.4th1150,1167[ageneraldemurrerdoesnotlietoonlypartofacauseofaction;iftherearesufficientallegationstoentitleplaintifftorelief,otherallegationscannotbechallengedbygeneraldemurrer];

CIVILCODE

UNRUHACT-CivilCode51• Allpersonswithinthejurisdictionofthisstatearefreeand

equal,andnomatterwhattheirsex,race,color,religion,ancestry,nationalorigin,disability,medicalcondition,geneticinformation,maritalstatus,sexualorientation,citizenship,primarylanguage,orimmigrationstatusareentitledtothefullandequalaccommodations,advantages,facilities,privileges,orservicesinallbusinessestablishmentsofeverykindwhatsoever

• Includeschooldistricts- NicoleM.v.MartinezUnifiedSch.Dist. (N.D.Cal.1997)964F.Supp.1369

• theterm“businessestablishment”tobeinterpreted“inthebroadestsensereasonablypossible,”(Isbister v.Boys’ClubofSantaCruz,Inc. (1985)40Cal.3d72,79

CivilCodeSections-51.9• Thereisabusiness,service,orprofessionalrelationshipbetween

theplaintiffanddefendantorthedefendantholdshimselforherselfoutasbeingabletohelptheplaintiffestablishabusiness,service,orprofessionalrelationshipwiththedefendantorathirdparty– Physician,attorney,landlord,teacher,electedofficial,directoror

producer,etc.

• Thedefendanthasmadesexualadvances,solicitations,sexualrequests,demandsforsexualcompliancebytheplaintiff,orengagedinotherverbal,visual,orphysicalconductofasexualnatureorofahostilenaturebasedongender,thatwereunwelcomeandpervasiveorsevere.

Ratification/Aiding/Abetting• CivilCode section52specificallystates“whoeverdenies,aidsorincites”is

liableforviolationofCivilCode section51– variousdamages• continuedmisconductbyanemployee,andtheemployer’sretentionofthat

employeedespiteknowledgeofthemisconduct,supportedaclaimofratification.C.R.v.TenetHealthcareCorp. (2009)169Cal.App.4th109

• Retentionofanemployeeafterknowledgeoftheemployee’sconductoranadequateopportunitytolearnoftheconductsupportsafindingofratification.(SeeC.R.v.TenetHealthcareCorp.(2009)169Cal.App.4th1094,1111-1112;Murillov.RiteStuffFoods,Inc. (1998)65Cal.App.4th833,852;McChristian v.Popkin (1946)75Cal.App.2d249,256;Coatsv.Construction&Gen.LaborersLocalNo.185 (1971)15Cal.App.3d908,913.)

• NegligencePerSe• PenalCode11166

MandatoryReporting

FALSEIMPRISONMENT

TrebleDamages

• 340.1• Resultofacoverup• GovernmentEntity?

• PoliciesandProcedures• Investigation• Employee’sfiles– Manyplaceskeeptheminvariouslocations

• Principal’soffice• Districtoffice

• WorkwithPolice• Investigatorforotherwitnesses• PaperFilesvs.ComputerFiles• CATeacher’sAssociation

Evidence

QUESTIONS?

Notice– Schoolhasadutytoprotectastudentfromforeseeableharm.

RandiW.v.Muroc JointUnifiedSchoolDist. (1997)14Cal.4th1066.– “itisnotnecessarythattheexactinjurieswhichoccurredhave

beenforeseeable;itisenoughthatareasonablyprudentpersonwouldforeseethatinjuriesofthesamegeneraltypewouldbelikelytooccurintheabsenceofadequatesafeguards”Daileyv.LosAngelesUnifiedSchoolDist.(1970)2Cal.3d748.

– theissueof‘foreseeability’doesnotdependupontheforeseeabilityofaparticularthirdparty’sact,butinsteadfocusesonwhethertheallegedlynegligentconductatissuecreatedaforeseeableriskofaparticularkindofharm.”Wienerv.SouthcoastChildcareCenters,Inc. (2003)107Cal.App.4th1429,1436.

M.W.v.PanamaBuenaVistaUnionSchoolDist. (2003)110Cal.App.4th508

ThefactthataparticularactofsodomyinaschoolbathroommayhavebeenunforeseeabledoesnotautomaticallyexoneratetheDistrictfromtheconsequencesofallowingstudents,particularlyspecialeducationstudents,unrestrictedaccesstothecampuspriortothestartofschoolwithwhollyinadequatesupervision.Suchconductcreatedaforeseeableriskofaparticulartypeofharm—anassaultonaspecialeducationstudent.Notonlywassuchanassaultreasonablyforeseeable,itwasvirtuallyinevitableunderthecircumstancespresentonthiscampus.

JenniferC.

• Studentassaultedbyanotherstudentinanalcoveoncampus• Nopriorincidentsbutcampusaidetoldtoregularlycheckduring

lunch• CourtofAppealheldthatamaintenanceofahidingplacewhere

studentscouldbeassaulted“satisfiestheforeseeabilityfactorofthedutyanalysisevenintheabsenceofpriorsimilaroccurrences.”“Acourt’stask...isnot todecidewhetheraparticularplaintiff’sinjurywasreasonablyforeseeableinlightofaparticulardefendant’sconductbutrathertoevaluatemoregenerallywhetherthecategoryofnegligentconductatissueissufficientlylikelytoresultinthekindofharmexperiencedthatliabilitymayappropriatelybeimposedonthenegligentparty

CONCLUSION

TaylorRayfield– trayfield@gbw.law

ScottCarr– scarr@gbw.law

HollyBoyer– hboyer@ecbappeal.com