 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County11/29/2000
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS in mandate. Charles W. McCoy, Judge.
Petition granted.
INTRODUCTION
In this appeal we hold that the time period within which a dependent minor must file a claim against a public entity under California's Tort Claims Act begins when a juvenile court appoints independent counsel pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 317, subdivision (e), for the purpose of pursuing the minor's tort claims.
Real parties Crystal B., Steven G., and Anita G. (hereinafter the minors) asserted personal injury claims against the County of Los Angeles (County) for physical and psychological abuse they allegedly received while placed in foster care. The County denied their application to file late tort claims under the Tort Claims Act (Gov. Code, § 900 et seq., hereinafter the Act). The minors then petitioned the trial court for relief from the claim-filing requirements of the Act. They argued that their claims did not accrue while they were dependent minors with no guardians ad litem or parent to protect their interests. The trial court granted the petitions and allowed the minors to file a complaint against the County. The County challenges this ruling, contending that even though the dependent minors did not have guardians ad litem, the juvenile court specifically appointed independent counsel to act on their behalf and pursue all potential tort claims against third parties. Because the minors did not apply to file late claims with the County within one year of the appointment of independent counsel, the County argues that the minors' claims were untimely and thus the trial court erred in allowing the claims.
An application to present a late claim against a governmental entity must be filed within one year of the accrual of the claim and a claimant's minority does not toll this one-year period. (Gov. Code, § 911.4, subds. (b) & (c).) We hold that the juvenile court's appointment of independent counsel under Welfare and Institutions Code section 317, subdivision (e), for the express purpose of pursuing all potential third party personal injury claims on behalf of the dependent minors caused the minors' tort claims against the County to accrue.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On January 7, 1998, the juvenile court appointed independent counsel for the dependent minors pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 317, subdivision (e). The order expressly stated that attorneys Morton Shatzkin and Karen Sue Shatzkin were appointed attorneys of record to represent the minors "in all potential third party personal injury . . . claims and probate matters on minor's behalf" and were required to "provide reports to both the court and the minors' dependency court attorney on the progress of the case on a regular basis." The court also ordered the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), County counsel, the minors' dependency court attorney, and the juvenile court clerk to produce all records concerning the minors to the newly-appointed independent counsel. Thus, the juvenile court appointed independent counsel not to represent the minors in the dependency matter, since they already had such counsel, but for the purpose of acting as their counsel in pursuing their tort claims. The appointed independent counsel never filed a tort claim on the minors' behalf.
In January 1999, the minors' mother retained their present counsel and on January 25, 1999 that counsel filed an application with the County requesting leave to present the minors' tort claims. The application alleged that the minors sustained a number of physical and mental injuries from 1991 to
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|