Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09011987 - 1.18 CLAIM �/ a BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: 'y' 0 . 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnings". CLAIMANT: :;1iAij PERTIR Coumy CoL_!f,yu; C/o Taw Offices of James J. Seltzer ATTORNEY: Water'gate Towers Al►G 1 3 198i 2200 Powell St . 7#1000 Date received Emeryville, �Ifr�e� illCA 94608 an '; `''' ADDRESS: Y BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 4, 1987 hd' 'd��i'. BY MAIL POSTMARKED: no envelope I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. August 12, 1987 PpHHIL BATCHELOR, ClerkWtaz� DATED: BY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: j��; f' BY: /�i`� �!!_ j 1 ` --Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present (x) This Claim is rejected in full. ( )\) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. 1117 Dated: SEP 1 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR Clerk, By ( ._�; Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order an Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. SEP 2 1987 Dated: BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by Deputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator LAW OFFICES OF JAMES JAY SELTZER RE ]ft PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION JAMES JAY SEATERGATE TOWERS, TENTH FLOORLOS ANGELES OFFICE 2200 POWELL STREET 2315 WESTWOOD BOULEVARD JONATHAN BRMERYVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94608 LOS ANGELES,CALIFORNIA 90064 RITA A.TOOME TELECOPIER (415) 596-2519 STEL.(213) 470-7888 DIRECTOR OF AD TELEPHONE (415) 596-2500 BARRY P.KING HELOR SIDNEY SEALINE ALAN J.GOULTA VISO OF COUNSEL OF COUNSEL u WASHINGTON OFFICE 4737 RESERVOIR ROAD, N.W. •ALSOMEMSEROFNEWTORASAR,D.C.SAR WASHINGTON, D.C.20007 TEL. (202) 337-4021 WILLIAM J.PLATZER OF COUNSEL CLAIM AGAINST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Name and Address of Claimant: Chad Perth 179 Julian San Francisco, CA 94103 Send Notices to: LAW OFFICES OF JAMES J. SELTZER Watergate Towers 2200 Powell Street, Suite 1000 Emeryville, CA 94608 Place and Date of Occurrence: Richmond, California May 1, 1987. Circumstances of Occurrence: Claimant was arrested on October 23, 1986 and charged with murder. On October 27, 1986 he was released after it was determined by the District Attorney's office that there was insufficient evidence to charge claimant with the crime. In mid-January of 1987, a warrant for claimant's arrest was issued. On January 21 , 1987 , claimant surrendered himself to police in Richmond. Claimant was held in custody in the Martinez County Jail from January 21 , 1987 until May 1, 1987 when the charges were again dropped by the District Attorney's office for insufficient evidence. Description of Damage or Loss: Claimant has suffered public humiliation and mental anguish, pain and suffering, emotional and physical distress, false arrest, false imprisonment , intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress in violation of the Civil Rights in the United States and California Constitution. LAW OFFICES OF JAMES JAY SELTZER Total Amount Claimed: $1, 000, 000 Breakdown of Amount Claimed: $500, 000 - General $500, 000 - Special DATED• - - JONATHAN BRAND, ESQ. CLAIM /4f BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $20, 000, 000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warr�ngs" ROBERT HERN F'oulAy CLAIMANT: c/o Moseley C. Collins III A Professional Corporation AUG 13 ATTORNEY: P. O. BOX 3269 San Jose, CA 95155 Date received Martine.-, C:/ ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 3 , 1987 hand del . BY MAIL POSTMARKED: no envelope I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: August 12 , 1987 ev: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (l�This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: t BY: // ^� %' / puty County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. C cep � Dated: SEP 1 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By -tom" fit,. � Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: S E P 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by D puty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator D 1 TO: Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County 2 651 Pine Martinez, CA 94553 IL EhKT HELOR 3 soA A 4 5 YOU AND EACH OF YOU are hereby notified that the 6 undersigned hereby serves and makes demand upon you for the cause 7 and amounts set forth in the following claim: 8 9 1. Claimants' name and address: Robert Hern, 5435 Sutter 10 Avenue, Richmond, California 94804. 11 12 2. Address to which all notices are to be sent: c/o Moseley 13 C. Collins, III, A Professional Corporation, Post Office Box 8269, San 14 Jose, California 95155. 15 16 3. Amount of claim, including estimated prospective injury 17 and damage, and basis of computation, so far as they are known at this 18 time: Mr. Hern has suffered severe head trauma resulting in coma. 19 Claimant is in stable condition and remains in a coma and is dependent 20 on a ventilator. Special Damages: The cost of medical care to date is 21 $400,000.00. The cost of long term future care is $1,000.00 to 22 $1,500.00 per day. Assuming claimant has a normal life span of 52 23 years, the present value of the costs of future medical care for 24 claimant's life time is estimated to be $19,000,000.00 and his claim for 25 i lost wages is $1,000,000.00 for total special damages of $20,000,000.00. 26 General Damages are unknown at this time. At time of trial claimant LAW OFFICES OF MOSELEY C.COLLINS, 111 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION - 1 will amend this claim to set forth his general damages according to 2 proof. 3 4 4. Date and place of occurrence giving rise to the claim 5 asserted: May 2, 1987 at the intersection of Appian Way and Corte 6 Arango, the same being public streets and highways in the County of 7 Contra Costa, and State of California. 8 9 5. Names of public employees causing injury and damage, if 10 known: Unknown at this time. 11 12 6. Description of occurrence: That on or about the 13 aforementioned date, and for some time prior thereto, the aforenamed 14 public entity, by and through its agents, servants, and employees, 15 negligently and carelessly controlled, supervised, designed, 16 constructed, altered, repaired, owned, maintained, operated, and 17 entrusted the aforementioned roadways, public streets and highways so 18 as to proximately cause and permit said roadways, signing, and right of 19 ways to be in a dangerous, defective, and unsafe condition. Further, 20 they failed to properly construct, design, maintain, and sign said 21 roadways and right of ways so as to permit safe passage of vehicular 22 traffic, thereby creating a reasonably foreseeable and substantial risk 23 of injury to persons using said roadways and right of ways; that said 24 public entities, and each of them, were further negligent and careless is 25 in that they knew, or in the exercise of ordinary care should have 26 known, of the the dangerous condition of said roadways and right of LAW OFFICES OF MOSELEY C.COLLINS. III A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1 ways, and failed to remedy said condition, having a reasonable 2 opportunity to do so; that as a direct and proximate result of the 3 negligence and carelessness of said public entities, and as a further 4 direct and proximate result of the dangerous and defective condition of 5 public property, as aforesaid, Robert Hern was seriously and 6 permanently injured. He suffered severe brain damage and head 7 injuries when a vehicle driven by one Jim Vretzos and owned by 8 Haralambos Vretzos struck his motorcycle. Mr. Hern was proceeding 9 straight on Appian Way. He was alone on his motorcycle. Mr. Vretzos 10 was at a stop sign on Corte Arango. As set forth above, the 11 intersection was dangerous and defective. As a result, the aforesaid 12 drivers were unable to safely negotiate the intersection and safely 13 travel that section of roadway, and a crash resulted wherein Robert 14 Hern was catastrophically injured as set forth above. 15 16 DATE: July 31, 1987 LAW OFFICES OF MOSELEY C. COLLINS, III 17 A PROFE IONAL CORPORATION 18 19 20 By: MDSE YM. COLLINS, III 21 Attorney for Claimant 22 23 hern 7-28-87/w37 24 25 �i 26 LAW OFFICES OF -3- MOSELEY C.COLLINS, III A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ,► ► CLAIM ��/� BOARD OF'SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: Unspecified Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "WarninLgsll. CLAIMANT. TAYLOR SUS SERVICE 01inty C011nse1 c/o Cesari, Werner and Moriarty A1ir, ATTORNEY: 360 Post Street ' n I ' 1987 San Francisco , CA 94108 Date received Jul 31 ,Mart.819eZ, CA 9455 ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON y 3 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: July 30, 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. August 3 , 1987 PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: g BY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. JXThis claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: �: G BY: Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present X) This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: SEP 11987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By___4 Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order aq Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. SEP 21987 Dated: BY: PHIL BATCHELOR bySe'4Z=A�eputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator Y { CITY DEPT. CONTROLLER OR CLERK = OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS { PUC OR MUNI RAILWAY { CITY ATTORNEY SUBJECT TO CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS SET FORTH IN THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT.CODE.THE LAW REQUIRES THAT A CLAIM CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE CONTROLLER OR THE CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WITHIN 100 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE ACCIDENT,EVENT OR OTHER OCCURRENCE GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM. DO NOT WRITE ABOVE THIS LINE DATE OF INCIDENT: DATE november 6 , 1986 TIME 4 :35 p.m. CLAIMANTS 1 FOR ATION: Taylor Maus Service 391-1113 NAME HOME PHONE BUS.PHONE ADDRESSC�O Cesari , Werner and MoriartyCITY San Francisco STATE Calif ZIP 94108 —3b ostS ree AMOUNT OF CLAIM ITEMIZATION OF CLAIM (INCLUDE COPIES OF BILLS AND/OR TWO ESTIMATES AND ANY OTHER DOCUMENTATION) Indemnity for any and all damages rendered $ against defendant Taylor Bus Service and $ Russell Wayne Johnson, in Contra Costa Superior $ Court action #298 , 848 filed by Robert MAttSTOTAL $ and R. W. Motts . CLAIM DESCRIPTION OF ACCIDENT/OCCURRENCE/TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION OF OCCURRENCE OR TRANSACTION(state below,in detail,all known facts and circumstances attending the incident identifying persons and property involved and the cause thereof). IF MORE SPACE REQUIRED,ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEET OF PAPER Plaintiff R. W. Motts was struck by a Taylor Bus Service vehicle on November er in the par. ing Iot of the Antioch 19 (ATTACH PHOTOS AND OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS) JUL- IF VEHICULAR ACCIDENT COMPLETE THIS SECTIO NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER IF OTHER THAN CLAIMANT (IF CITY EMPLOYEE STATE EMPLOYEE'S NAME AND DEPARTMENT) MAKE 8 CITY VEHICLE INVOLVED: MODEL LICENSE NO. DEPARTMENT WITNESSES NAME ADDRESS(No.,street,city,state,zip) r SIGNEDB'Y O ALF OF',THE CIA AN DATE OF CLAIM July 30, 1987 ADDR /S'f0 W H NO CE IS TO BE SENT Y CITY STATE ZIP CLAIM p o F BOARD OF SUPCRV!SOR'S OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY., CALIFORNIA Cle.im Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1, 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $1 , 000, 000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnin " CLAIMANT: JACK MALONE unry COufsel c/o Anna deLeon All(,- (l I . 1987 ATTORNEY: 1840 Woolsey St. .3iA 94 Berkeley, CA 94703 Date received Inez, C ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON July 31 , 1987 553 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: July 30 , 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. August 3, 1987 PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: BY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: 6w . Z�, BY: // " ,t Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER:ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. J � Dated: P 1 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By , Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: SEP 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by7 Deputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator „ ,cEiVED j L � 1987 CLAIM AGAINsr COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA JACK MALONE Ift"t as, C064iWANTO presents a claim foe dambArs ,spins, THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA in the %um of A 1000 1000.00 CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS- 1840 Woolsey Street, Berkeley, California 94703 DATE OF OCCURRENCE:_ - July 7 , 1987 PLACF OF OCCURRENCE:- County Jail, Martinez SAID CLAIM ARISES FROM FOLLOVING CIRCUMSTANCES:- With no -probable cause claimant was hurled to the ground ("body-slammed”) by Jailer Seidman. He was denied medical treatment for many hours by Officer Seidman and other County employees. When finally taken to the hospital, he was operated on for a broken hip, having sustained a permanent disability. rTE45. NATLRE AND EXTENT OF DAMAGES OR INJURIES: -Assault; Battery_; Denial medical treatment; Negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Anna de Leon Attorney for Claimant .. CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT SeptemBer 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $1 , 000 , 000 . 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Wadings". CLAIMANT: TOM K. TERRILL oUnry Counsel c/o Brian D. Seibel Q1fr, it ATTORNEY: McNichols , :McCann, Seibel & Inderbitzen 1 1981 Mart 18 Crow Canyon Court #395 Date received i ADDRESS: San Ramon, CA 94583 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON July 30, 19�/2� CA 9455 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: July 29 , 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. August 3, 1987 PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: g BY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: �. �� BY: eputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present ( This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. C Dated: SEP 1 l _PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, IB �-t �� Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimantas shown above. Dated: SEP 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by eputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator RECEIVED CLAIM AGAINST PUBLIC ENTITY JUL A9 1987 TO THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA: TOM R. TERRILL, hereby makes claim against the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA for the sum of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) and makes the following statements in support of the claim: 1. Claimant's address is 2049 Rockspring Place, Walnut Creek, California, 94596. 2. Notices concerning the claim should be sent to Brian D. Seibel of McNICHOLS, McCANN, SEIBEL & INDERBITZEN, 18 Crow Canyon Court, Suite 395, San Ramon, California, 94583 3 . The date and place of the occurrence giving rise to this claim are June 21, 1987, at Baseball Field No. 2 at Heather Farms Park in the City of Walnut Creek, County of Contra Costa. 4. The circumstances giving rise to this claim are as follows: on the above date on Baseball Field No. 2 at Heather Farms Park, claimant was engaged and playing in a baseball game as part of an organized Baseball League, which baseball field was in a dangerous condition due to inadequate maintenance and supervision and, due to the dangerous condition, claimant stepped into a hole in the playing field causing him serious and permanent injury. 5. The full nature and extent of claimants injuries are unknown to date. Claimant has suffered a broken foot which has and will require extensive reconstructive surgery and may result in permanent damage to claimant. 6. The names of the public employees causing the claimant's injuries are unknown. 7. My claim as of the daze 'of this claim is One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) . S. The basis of computation of the above amount is as follows: Medical Expenses Incurred to Date: approx $15,000.00 Estimated Future Medical Expenses: $50,000.00 Loss of Wages: None to date General Damages: $935, 000.00 Total $1,000, 000.00 Dated: July 29, 1987 McNichols, McCann, Seibel & Inderbitzen By:aC)/ Brian D. Seibel CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA C,laim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1, 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $100, 000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "WarnGefjn, CLAIMANT: BETTY LAWSON, ET AL - Y C���sel c/o Anna deLeon A��r n 2 19BJ ATTORNEY: 1840 Woolsey St. Mart; e2 Berkeley, CA 94703 Date received C ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON July 31 , 1987 A 945$3 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: July 30, 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. PH gg DATED: August 3 , 1987 BYIL DeputyLOR, Clerk L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: L /"4-2 BY: In /,�' � ��/ /�LD_eputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present (� ) This Claim is rejected in full. Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: SEP 11987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By � �s Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: SEP . 2 198 7 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by puty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator • RECEIVED JUL,rl 1887 CLAIM AGAINST COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA BETTY LAWSON, ESZTER FREEMAN, HAROLD CARLSTAD, presents a claim for damages SHERRY STUDLEY �•�� ' against COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA in the sera of 1 100 ,000.00 as per claimant CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS- 1 840 Woolsey STreet, Berkeley, California 94703 DATE OF OCCI;&RENCE: June 15 , 1987 PLAC F. OF OCCIIRRENCE: Gates of Concord Naval Weapons Station a SMD CLAIM ARISES FROM FOLLOWING CIRCUMSTANCES: P„rc,iant to arrest at/peaceful demonstration, claimants were handcuffed with single loop plastic cuffing material. They repeatedly informed Contra Costa Deputy Sheriffs that the cuffs were too tight, that cirulation was impaired, but the Sheriffs refused to loosen or remove the cuffs for approximately :Lwo hours. Claimants suffered, and continue to suffer extreme pain, seas of numbness and emotional distress. They have sought medical treatment. 'r r ITEMS. NATLRE AND EXTENT OF DAMAGES OR INJURIES: Assault and battery; Tntentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress; Negligence; Violation of civil rights. Anna de Leon Attorney for Claimants CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1, 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $1 , 000 , 000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "WarniogU CLAIMANT: TONY F . AND ELECTOR WILLIMS unry Counsel 73 Brookwood, #2 ASG n � ' 198 ATTORNEY: Orinda, CA 94563 Marti Date received net, C ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON .July 31 , 1987 CC A 94553 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: no envelove I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. August 3 , 1987 PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: BY: Deputy L. Hall I1. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( >(This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: > C'/' By; eputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present (�( ) This Claim is rejected in full. (��) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. C Dated: SEP 11987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: S E P 2 1981 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR byputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator 1 IN J L_1 L= 2 1 1937 OF MO2`iAGi.i CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF MORAGA P E ET A 1 Z County Counsel 1987 CLAIMANTS' NAME: TONY F: and ELECTOR WILLIAMS Martinez, CA 94563 CLAIMANT' S ADDRESS: 73 Brookwood, Apartment 2 Orinda, CA (415) 376-4946 AMOUNT OF CLAIM: $1, 000, 000 . 00 ADDRESS TO WHICH NOTICES ARE TO BE SENT: 73 Brow ''�ED Orinda, C 01411 DATE OF INCIDENT: April 13 , 1987. JLi� ��1987 LOCATION OF INCIDENT: 99 Danefield Place Moraga, CA 94556 HOW DID IT OCCUR: City of Moraga Fire Department rsonnel in responding to a kitchen grease fire at 99 Danefield Place, on or about April 13, 1987, negligently and carelessly failed to completely extinquish all areas of fire and smoldering material, and negligently failed to inspect and monitor said premises for additional areas of potential fire, thereby proximately causing the total destruction by fire of said premises and all of the contents of said premises .fourteen (14) hours after the initial blaze. DESCRIBE DAMAGE OR INJURY: Total destruction by fire of home and (29 years of accumulated) contents . NAME OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE(S) CAUSING INJURY OR DAMAGE, IF KNOWN: City of Moraga Fire Department personnel, identities currently unknow to claimants . ITEMIZATION OF DAMAGES Total amount of damages unknown at the present time. DATED: Signed by or on behalf of ClaimaQ csrJ 7- LIAMS CLAIM AGAINST CITY OF MORAGA 950d CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA " laim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board AcJon. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors �— (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $2 , 500 . 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Wp OU 11�/ Y Counsel CLAJ?.ANT: JOHN DANIEL BUETTGENABACH c/o John C. Willbrand, Esq. AUG n 1 ' I9e, ATTORNEY: 2280 Diamond Blvd. , #440 Martinet, A Concord, CA 94520 Date received 04553 ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON July 31 , 1987 hand del . BY MAIL POSTMARKED: no envelope I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. IL gATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: August 3, 1987 ��: Deputy __ V���1 — t. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. (� This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying \ claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: ��f�—[L ����' BY: `� /L ;� �, �De uty County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present (}�) This Claim is rejected in full, Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. SEP 11987 L. Dated: PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By r Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. SEP 2 1987 Dated: BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by G� Deputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator JOHN C. WILLSRAND IVED COMMERCE CENTER ATTORNEY AT LAW 2250 DIAMOND BLVD., SUITE 4405 EPHON : 676-8800 11 CONCORD. CALIFORNIA 94520 `I�i L AREA ODE:415 IL 'A ONELO CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FeT ws To: County of Contra Costa Claimant, JOHN DANIEL BUETTGENBACH whose address is c/o John C. Willbrand, 2280 Diamond Blvd., Suite 440, Concord, CA 94520, hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa for the sum of $2,500.00 and make the following statements in support of the claim: 1. All notices concerning this claim shall be directed to the following: John C. Willbrand, Esq. 2280 Diamond Blvd. , Suite 440 Concord, CA 94520 2. The conduct giving rise to the claim began May 6, 1987. 3. The circumstances giving rise to the claim are as follows: Mr. Buettgenbach's claim for damages arises out of an incident on May 6, 1987 when he was arrested at his home at approximately 10:00 p.m. He was taken to the Martinez Jail and detained until approximately 2 :00 a.m. when he was released. There were no valid grounds for arresting and detaining Mr. Buettgenbach. 4. Claimant seeks TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($2, 500.00) in general and special damages incurred in being falsely arrested and imprisoned. In addition to monetary damages, Mr. Buettgenbach feels that he is entitled to an apology by the people responsible as well as a detailed explanation as to why he was arrested and jailed. DATED: July 30, 1987 9, OHN C. WILLBRAND, Attorney or Claimant JOHN BUETTGENBACH CLAIM 30ARD OF S ?ERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1, 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $500, 000- 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnipas" C�OuRt f CGUf1&�-�j CLAIMANT: STACY SESSLER c/o Domenic J. Cannizzaro PRIG 13 1987 ATTORNEY: A Professional Corporation f:;�.�i�tiEZ C��: c' `; , 785 Market St . , #630 Date received ADDRESS: San Francisco , CA 94103 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 5 , 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: not legible P 480 853 290 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: August 12 , 1987 BY: Deputy <L L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. (, )\This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: J 46 V,-/i�— 1-4 BY: / ��' / eputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present (/\ ) This Claim is rejected in full. (� �) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. SEP 11987 Dated: PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, Byzezz,�Z�� , Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. o Dated: SEP 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by C puty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator ,Iv r REC �- 1997 AMENDED CLAIM AGAINST THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA �sotil TO: CLERK, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1. Claimant's Name: STACY SESSLER Claimant's Address: 46 Buena Vista Ave. , Mill Valley, CA, 94941 Claimant's Telephone Number: (415) 381-4831 2. Post Office Address to which notices are to be sent: DOMENIC J. CANNIZZARO, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 785 Market Street, Suite 630, San Francisco, CA, 94103 (415) 397-1779 3. Circumstances of occurrence or transaction giving rise to claim: Date of Occurrence: April 28, 1987. Place of Occurrence: St. Mary's Road, approx. 233 feet south of Rheem Blvd. , Town of Moraga Automobile accident caused by negligent and defective design and construction of highway. 4. General description of indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as is now known: Claimant suffered severe personal injuries, medical expenses, lost income, loss of income earning capacity, severe emotional distress,permanent disability, and general damages. 5. Name or names of public employee or employees causing injury or damage if known: Unknown. 6. Amount claimed now: $ 500,000.00 Estimated amount of future loss, if known $ Unknown TOTAL Unknown 7. Basis of above computation: Computation based upon the nature and extent of the claimant's injuries, and damages including but not limited to severe personal injuries, medical expenses, income loss, loss of income earning capacity, severe emotional distress, permanent disability, general damages, and a certainty of substantial medical expenses in the future. Dated: August 4, 1987. Signed by or on behalf of Claimant: DOMENIC J. CANNIZZARO A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION By ANTHONY J. 0 Attorney for Claimant AMENDED CLAIM AGAINST THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA TO: CLERK, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1. Claimant's Name: STACY SESSLER Claimant's Address: 46 Buena Vista Ave. , Mill Valley, CA, 94941 Claimant's Telephone Number: (415) 381-4831 2. Post Office Address to which notices are to be sent: DOMENIC J. CANNIZZARO, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 785 Market Street, Suite 630, San Francisco, CA, 94103 (415) 397-1779 3. Circumstances of occurrence or transaction giving rise to claim: Date of Occurrence: April 28, 1987. Place of Occurrence: St. Mary's Road, approx. 233 feet south of Rheem Blvd. , Town of Moraga Automobile accident caused by negligent and defective design and construction of highway. 4. General description of indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as is now known: Claimant suffered severe personal injuries, medical expenses, lost income, loss of income earning capacity, severe emotional distress,permanent disability, and general damages. 5. Name or names of public employee or employees causing injury or damage if known: Unknown. 6. Amount claimed now: $ 500,000.00 Estimated amount of future loss, if known $ Unknown TOTAL Unknown 7. Basis of above computation: Computation based upon the nature and extent of the claimant's injuries, and damages including but not limited to severe personal injuries, medical expenses, income loss, loss of income earning capacity, severe emotional distress, peYmanent disability, general damages, and a certainty of substantial medical expenses in the future. Dated: August 4, 1987. Signed by or on behalf of Claimant: DOMENIC J. CANNIZZARO A PROFESSIONAL CORPO}RATION By ANTHONY J. Attorney for Claimant • CLAIM HARD C' SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: *250 , 000 . 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warning�vgpnty CGL nse� CLAIMANT: KENNETH C . GEHRING �,l{(; 1987 9170 Oak Avenue ATTORNEY: Orangevale, CA 95662 C ` Date received ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 6 , 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: August 5 , 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. Pp Au August 14, 1987 HHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: g BY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Zl Dated: BY: puty County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present (J� ) This Claim is rejected in full. /( \) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. C Dated: SEP 1 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: SEP 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR b Z �e _e��,Z�puty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator 1 KENNETH C. GEHRING RECEIVED 9170 Oak Avenue 2 Orangevale , California 95662 � �� ( 916 ) 988-8613 �(�� 3 A In pro per 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE MATTER OF: CLAIM AGAINST A PUBLIC ENTITY 9 KENNETH C. GEHRING 10 Claimant 11 / 12 13 TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 14 KENNETH C. GEHRING hereby makes a claim against CONTRA 15 COSTA COUNTY for the sum of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars 16 ( $250 , 000 . 00 ) and makes the following statements in support of th 17 claim: 18 1 . Claimant ' s address is 9170 Oak Avenue, Orangevale, 19 CA 95662 . 20 2 . Notices concerning this claim should be sent to 21 the above address . 22 3 . The date and place of the occurrence giving rise to 23 this claim is on or about May 8 , 1987 in Lafayette, California. 24 4 . The circumstances giving rise to this claim are 25 as follows : 26 a. Claimant was involved in a traffic collision 27 resulting in a fatality. 28 b. The cause of the traffic accident was an -1- 1 improperly designed, marked, maintained and/or controlled inter- 2 section at Pleasant Hill Road and Mt . Diablo Boulevard and the 3 on-ramp to Highway 24 . 4 C. claimant incurred approximately lost wages, 5 property damage, legal fees, and mental and emotional distress, 6 all in the sum of $250 , 000 . 00 . 7 DATED: - 1987 8 j A {( KENNETH C.�GEHRING 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- 1 PROOF OF SERVICE BY. MAIL 2 I am a citizen of the United States and employed in 3 the County of Sacramento , State of California . I am over the 4 age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled 5 action . My business address is 713 9th Street , Suite 200 , 6 Sacramento , Cz;lifornia 95814 . 7 On August 5 , 1987 , I served the withi 8 9 CLAIM AGAINST A PUBLIC ENTITY K. GEHRING v CALIFORNIA 10 11 on Defendant in said action by depositing 12 a true and correct copy (copies) thereof in the United States 13 mail in Sacramento , California , in a sealed envelope , with 14 postage fully prepaid, addressed as follows : 15 16 CONTRA COSTA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 651 Pine St. , Room 106 17 Martinez, CA 94553 18 19 20 21 22 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing 23 is true and correct . 24 Executed on — — �� , AT 5acramento , California . 25 26 27 28 h CLAIM �(�d BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $100. 000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "WarGE40Lty Couns l CLAIMANT: GEORGE PLUCIENTKOWSKI AUG G 1 3 1987 2864 Melanie Court ATTORNEY: Walnut Creek, CA 94596 CA T,i.:: Date received ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 7 , 19.87 hand del . BY MAIL POSTMARKED: no enveloTAe I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel. Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. JyIL BAATT%LOR, Clerk DATED: August 14, 1987 l� L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (N This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: � lr� //` /r BY: A Deputy County Counsel I11. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present () This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By G��i Deputy Clerk Dated: S E P 1 1987 WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 16; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. S E P 2 1987 n Dated: BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by puty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator C L A I' �ib':i� BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ur w. ..�. Instructions to Claimant Return original app»cativi, Clerk of the Board 651 Pine St., Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 A. Claims relating to causes of action for death or 'for Injury to person or to personal property or growing crops must be presented not later than the 100th day after the accrual of the cause of action. ' Claims relating to any other cause of action must be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Sec. 911.2, Govt. Code) 8. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, GS1 Fine Street, Martinez , California 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. . E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims, Penal Code Sec. 72 at end of this form. RE: Claim by )Reserved for Clerk's filing stamps Against the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA) 7r- 19 } or DISTRICT) P,WsA moot --7r-i137 n name ) aO c°fos o� The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named District in the sum of $ and in support of this claim represents as follows: IiTlien ala the damage or In3uzy occur? Give exact date dna ftourj �."intFieze`dia tFie amage or In3ury occur? ZIIncluse city and courtyj -T--_��Pld_tj�eZg;dk_�mage now or in uz� y occ r? Give �uII details, use extra sheets if required) �,- 4. ilfiat pai`tl`cMarr"accto=`o`anlialon`on the`pazt o�`coun�y`oz`�iitrl--ct —-- officers, servants or employees caused the injury or damage? (over) 5. ' bkt are the nares of county or district officers, servants or' employees causing the damage or injury? -- --+— r--T--- --+------T------ —+— + 6. wFiat damage orn3uries do you claim resulted? ZGveuII extent of injpries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto A `� damage) G G 99 7 CC 2tzc-zk �L"�T Q2uA CC4G�1c �ti , u / t2co �iL�iX �j 7. -How was the a nt claimed above computed? (Include the-estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage. ) ctt,, �?��� 1�/_� -fGCQ,-�-/�-Gti?� ���12' �'� '� -=�'-� �-�a'u0 z.f' r`'c•�c'.�,K 17-0; -; and addresses of wi nesses, doctors and hospitals. �. List tie expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE - : . _,.,... _ ITEM AMOUNT IRRRRR##R#*R##tR#####*R#R#R##R*RR�SR#!R#R!R!R#RRR#R:!!#R#RR#!*RRIRlIRRRIRR#fir i e , Govt. Code Sec. 910.2 provides: "The claim signed by the claimant SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) or bX some Vexxon onn, bis behalf. " 7 Name and Address of Attorney ti- ClaimantIp ign ture A re Telephone No. Telephone No. Y, !!!!!R!!!!Rt###RR###RR######R#R#RRlRR#RRR#R##RRR#RRRRR#!##R!!R#R!!!R!R##R# NOTICE Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: 'Every person who, *with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, town, city district, ward or village board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account, voucher , or writing, is guilty of a felony. " s . .� CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1, 1187 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $1, 500,000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. - Please note all "Warnings". CLAIMANT: WILLIAM EUGENE DAVIES County Counsel 2214 Manzanita Way #A AUG 13 1987 ATTORNEY: Antioch, CA 94509 Date received Martinez CA 945x3 ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 7 , 1987 'hand d-e'� . BY MAIL POSTMARKED. no envelope I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO.�'County.Coun5el Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: August 14, 1987 PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk BY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors { This claim complies substantially with Sections Seec,,ti/ons 910 and 910.2. 7 0 �.. . �f�✓' ✓ .r r:,c�t'� 1�t i ''1 `{ f 0 C� �`-/ G��!�--e �i �J� d��e C' ( ) This claim FAILS to com subs a tia ly wi h Sections 10 and 910. , and we are n tifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). k�; �� 'Ifs T A16i/ J��f� :./f%1.i /)iO�.r >` i�� /(�i� /flt/i (�Pi{�Jf ��'AJ3 All, Claim is°not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: BY: / Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) (�) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present (Y) This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date.. Dated: S G P 11987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, 8y Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: SEP 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by GC� Deputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator I A CLAIM AGAINST THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ^6,//��(� G�- RECEIVED TO: CLERK, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1987 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY q V7 4*K.' PHIL OATCHELOR 651 Pine Street A BOARD F SUPERVISORS RA STA Cp. Martinez , CA 94553 WILLIAM EUGENE DAVIES hereby makes a claim against CONTRA COSTA COUNTY for the sum of One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1 ,500 ,000 .00 ) and makes the following statements in support of the claim: 1 . The Claimant' s post office address is 2214 Manzanita Way , #A, Antioch , California 94509 . 2 . Notices concerning the claim should be sent to 2214 Manzanita Way , #A, Antioch , California 94509 . 3 . The dates and places of the occurrences giving rise to this claim are March 19 , 1987 through May 10 , 1987 , at Antioch , California . 4 . The circumstances giving rise to this claim are as follows : The below named members of the Contra Costa County Social Services Department, among others , filed a petition in the Contra Costa County Juvenile Court in Proceeding Numbers 76551 and 76552 , alleging that the Claimant sexually molested ANDREA DENISE CARDOSO, a minor . Said claim was malicious , unfounded and negligent in that there was no evidence to support the allegations set forth in the petition . The Claimant immediately denied said allegtions . Notwithstanding said denial , it was not until April 30 , 1987 , and May 10 , 1987 that the unfounded petitions were dismissed by the Department of Social Services , all of which caused the Claimant serious injuries . 5 . The Claimant' s injuries are: Humiliation, physical and emotional distress , the unnecessary expenditure of funds for attorney' s fees , treatment and general damages . 6 . The names of the public employees causing the Claimant' s injuries are: ROBERT DEXTER, CHERYL SUBICA, and other public employees currently unknown to Claimant . 7 . My claim at the date of this claim is One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1 ,500 ,000 .00 ) . 8 . The basis of computation of the above is as follows : 1 . Attorney' s fees $ Unknown at present 2 . Estimated medical expenses Unknown at present 3 . Loss of wages Unknown at present 4 . General damages 1 ,400 ,000 .00 Total $ 1 ,500 ,000 .00 Dated : August 6 , 1987 f WILLIAM EUGENEIES L CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $500, 000- 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warni s" �Onty Counsel CLAIMANT: PIRKKO SILFWERSVARD c/o William Robledo Edgar AA IG 13 1987 ATTORNEY: 1440 Broadway, Suite 810 Fv}. ti r"e Z., C:f'� C, : :; Oakland, CA 94612 Date received ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 6 , 1987 hand del . BY MAIL POSTMARKED: no envelope I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: August 14, 1987 ppHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk BY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: BY: Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present X) This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: SEP 1 1981 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By ,/ L CIL eputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant aps shown-above. SEP E 2 1987 G� ty Clerk Dated: BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by CC: County Counsel County Administrator CLAIM TO: BOARD OF SUFhXV 4 bump %i. Instructions to Claimant Return original application tc Clerk of the Board 651 Pine St., Room 106 Martinez, CA ' 94553 A. Claims relating to causes of action for death or' foir injury to person or to personal property or growing crops must be presented not later than the 100th day after the accrual of the cause of action. - Claims relating to any other cause of action Faust be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Sec. 911. 2, Govt. Code) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106 , County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez , California. 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors , rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims , Penal Code Sec. 72 at end of this form. RE: Claim by )Reserved for Clerk's filing stamps PIRKKO SILFWERSVARD � IvD D� 1987 Against the COUNTY OF'ZONTRA COSTA) 11 ,1kP&4 ) BAT ELOR or DISTRICT) Ps L. (Fill 4Jco in name ) o The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named District in the sum of $ 500,000.00 and in support of this claim represents as follows : ------------------------ -------------- ------------------ ----- ---- �. iahen did the damage or injury occur? Give exact date and hour] May 4, 1987 -- Exact time unknown but apparently sometime between an approximate 10 : 00 a.m. phone conversation of attorney WILLIAM ROBLEDO EDGAR -with Sheriff' s Captain Moore and a subsequent 11: 45 a.m, conversation of the same parties . - ----.--T-T ----•�------ - ------------ --- �. hThere did tFie dam-age or injury occur? Include-.--ci--ty and county] Martinez, California 3. How did the damage or in0ury occur? (GiveuII details, use extra sheets if required) Autopsy performed upon GEORGE SILFWERSVARD in 'deliberate disregard of letter demanding no autopsy be performed (copy attached hereto an incorporated by reference) and phone instructions by attorney 14ILLIAM ROBLEDO EDGAR to Contra Costa County' s Sheriff Captain Moore that -no autopsy be performed. 4. what particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers , servants or employees caused the injury or damage? Answer to Question 3 (above) incorporated by reference. (over) 5. - Wh:-.t are the names of county or district officers , servants or- employe%es causing the damage or injury? Sheriff's Captain Moore (full name unknown) , names - of- other County of Contra Costa employees and/or agents are unknown. 6. What damage or injuries do you claim resu�te�3 ZG�ve full extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage) Severe emotional distress. ' --------------------------------------------------------------------- --- 7 . How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimate amount of any prospective injury or damage. ) Past, present and future emotional distress. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. Names and addresses of witnesses , doctors and hospitals. WILLIAM ROBLEDO EDGAR Bente Wilson Attorney at Law 708 Longridge Road 1440 Broadway, Suite 810 Oakland, California 94610 Oakland, California 94612 (415) 444-2150 --------------------------------------------------------------------�--- 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury- : DATE ITEM AMOUNT Govt. Code Sec. 910.2' provides : "The claim signed by the claimant SEND NOTICES To: (Attorney) _ or by some person on his behalf. " Name and Address of Attorney Claima t s Signature WILLIAM ROBLEDO EDGAR 3746 Park Blvd. Way . 1440 Broadway, Suite 810 Address Oakland, California 94612 Oakland, California 94612 Telephone No. (415) 444-2150 Telephone No. (415) 444-7688 NOTICE Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: "Every person who, -with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, • or to any county, town, city district, ward or village board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account, voucher , or writing, is guilty of a felony. " WILY.IW ROBLEDO EDGAR ATTORNEY AT LAW May 3 , 1987 1440 BROADWAY. SUITE 810 OAKLAND. CALIFORNIA 94612 14151 4442150 Coroner' s Office Contra Costa County HAND DELIVERED Martinez, California Re: GEORGE SILFWERSVARD, deceased May 2; 1987. Dear Sir : Louri Silfwersvard and Pirkko Silfwersvard , respectively the surviving wife and mother of the above-named deceased GEORGE SILFWERSVARD, do hereby demand that no autopsy be performed upon him. Request is also made that all personal property of GEORGE SILFWERSVARD taken into possession by your office be delivered. over to his wife Louri Silfwersvard. Thank you for your attention to our inquiries and the kind courtesies extended to us by deputies Nunes and Young. Very truly yours, /s/ Louri Silfwersvard LOURI SILFWERSVARD /s/ Pirkko Silfwersvard PIRKKO SILFWERSVARD _ CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to GovernMnt Code Amount: $600, 000. 00+ Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnings . y CLAIMANT: ARTHUR JAMES LEWIS AUG 13 1987 P. O. Box 2919 ATTORNEY: Richmond, CA 94804 Fvi�:►firc�, (� Date received ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 5 , 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: August 4, 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. gY DATED: August 12 , 1987 BPpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk : Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 1/1� This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: n Dated: IL117 ( ) SY: ! eputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present (/1) This Claim is rejected in full. Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. SEP 1 1987 Dated: PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By, Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. SEP 21987 Dated: BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by uty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator ..CLAIN TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA .COUNTY Instructions to Claimant Return original application to Clerk of the Board 651 pine St.. Room 106 Martinez. CA 94553 A. Claims relating to causes of action for death or' for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops must be presented not later than the 100th day after the accrual of the cause of action.' Claims relating to any other cause of action must be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the -cause of action. (Sec. 911.2, Govt. Code) S. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 pine Street, Martinez, California 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against mneme than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. . E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims, Penal Code Sec. 72 at end of this form. •tt*tf�t*•�/1t�R•RftttRR*�****t***�tltltt*•!!*!!•tA!!R!*!!**!!!!!!!!!!!!! RE: Claim by )Reserved for Clerk's filing stamps ARTIIUR LEWIS ) RBCE1VED Against the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA) nil!; 51987 RICHTUND HEALTH CLINIC, ) or/CONTRA COSTA HEALTH SmwicEVISTRI CT) c F1 n name ) , The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named District in the sum of $ 600.( 0o, in Arlditirm +-„ . 54cal and in support of this claim represents as follows: expenses. I -rrrr rrr Nor. /iTFien ala the elamage or Inlury occur? ZGive exact dateana fiourj JULY 2, 1987, at approximately 8:30 - 10:30 a.m. �:_rezerdiartFierdamageror In�u=yroccur?--?Include-city anun East entry, first floor, Richmond Health Clinic, Richmond, California. r�rrrrr-ala- rrrr..-- -rrrrrrr rr rr -rrrr r r rr rrrrr rrrrrrrrr 3. How did the damage or in�ury occur? ZGiveuII details, use extra sheets if required) In entering the entry to the lobby through the set of double doors, I entered through the right door to enter, slipped on something, left leg slipped outward and upward, �.I reached out and• held onto door, and wrenched my body, especially my lower back. I looked down and saw a liquid that looked like coffee, with milk. r rr r rrrrr r.tr r rrrr r rr r r r rr r r r r r rrrrrr rrrrrr r rr rr r rrr rrr ♦rrr rrrr ' Z. 11Tat particular act or omission on the part o� county or district officers, servants or employees caused the injury or damage? The Health Clinic and/or the County was negligent in not cleaning up the liquid, which was not noticeable to someone coming into the entry doors, thereby causing a hazard. (over) 4 ✓ 5, Whdt ar"6 the names of county or district officers, servants or' employees causing the damage. or injury? Manager of the Richmond Health Clinic, the director of the Health Services Department, the Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County. 6. wFiat damage or �n3uiies do you clam resu�ted� ZG�ve �uYI extent of inj ies or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage I have had the doctors at the Richmond Health Clinic examine me, .take x-rays, and prescribe medicatipn for my injuries, Continual pains throughout my body and joints, emotional distress - -Agcjray.lion of.Lri4�L�.A713 .5.-------- 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the esttmeted -- amount of any prospective injury or damage. ) The amount of aggravation of prior injuries, and an estimate of compensation for the loss of enjoyment of life I feel as a result of the continual pains. ------------- ----------------------------------------------------- �. Names and addresses of witnesses, doctors and hospitals. a. Guard on the second floor of clinic, to whom I reported my fall on 7/2/87. b. i�ls. Es. Shepard, who tcyJk, azo acc:ici apt report on iil/d 7. c. Several ladies near entryway. d. A doctor, associate of Dr. Jonathan Francis, Vale Road, San Pablo. e. Dr. Taylor, Richmond Health Clinic. �. List tie expenditures you made on account of th2s accident or �n3ury: DATE ITEM AMOUNT 7/6, 13/87 Transportation to Richmond Health Approx. $5.00/trip Clinic, to Dr. Francis' office. d •:w�,x_....:... ... :...: M...... .. . Govt. Code Sec. 910.2 provides : "The claim signed by the claimant SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) or by some personon bis half. " t Name and Address of Attorney v ' Claimant's gnature CA 94806 t!dress, �.. /IL es /4zVt- Telephone No. Telephone No. 232-5708 !!!lRRtlRlR«!«««!!!##«!!!«««#«!!«!!R!!«««««««««!!«!R!«lRRRlRlRlRRRRRRRR!!« NOTICE Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: 'Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, ' or to any county, town, city district, ward or village board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the sane if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account, voucher, or writing, is guilty of a felony. " CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $2 , 000, 000 . 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnings". 7i� C� r�of CLAIMANT: TIMOTHY FRANK WADE c/o Paul Comisky ATTORNEY: 1317 18th Street J<<,.,z;; San Francisco, CA 94107 Date received ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 5 , 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: August 4, 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. g BY DATED: August 12 1987 PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk : Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors INA This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: ` BY4Z e.4/�eputy County Counsel h I b /% / L III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (I) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present K) This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. C , Dated: S E P 11987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By � � Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: SEP 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by GZe__DeVJ-ty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator CLAIM TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA c:UUv-l-s Instructions to Claimant Return original application tc Clerk of the Board 651 Pine St., Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 A. Claims relating to causes of action for death or­for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops must be presented not later than the 100th day after the accrual of the cause of action. ' Claims relating to any other cause of action must be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Sec. 911.2, Govt. Code) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez , California 94553. C. If claim isagainst a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. . E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims , Penal Code Sec. 72 at end `of this form. RE: Claim by )Reserved for Clerk's filing stamps �CEIVED Against the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA) � "��e� or dAi DISTRICT) AA (Fillin name ) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named District in the sum of $ and in support of this claim represents as follows: I.- when did the damage or Injury occur? Give exact date and au tl? .__Qfiere did-tfie damag---f In3ury occur? Include city and county3 IVX, .1Ai`�y csi/ 10,12 6owXka 6 sA# 90i C�a>w 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (GiveuII details; use extra sheets if required) Wliez 4-)o "s� -�v 0b,4- my 1141)4 S b `l�iid/, i�f/ 6��� 414�1 ck,4 ; hE/l my ,[pis c�c�w� Gv�i� �e ��E ,Ci,psf /rvo .1)e1Ovr�ie5 10�oche'o FkJc.�e�r� f 4. ghat particular act or omission on the part of county or distrt officers, servants or employees caused the injury or damage? /e ! y,76 rc �f' Cv1ai/e ,6e,w a,6.5cWb,,o (�y 3.1ePJ�:s .CJ s /��t ; C i (over) 5. What are -the names of county or district officers servants or' employees causing the damage or injury? �v�y 6. What damage or injuries do you claim resulted? ZGive buil extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage) o�' ,�',6 ,�'.��'�(clot`t ,�jacv amu. p��y ,�c,5"+v5� 1 tvAs/)� /��/ccF•�1� ,C�'�i�5,� v`Ic �sl:� ��� r�I,�yi1_ k'_ r- s --- 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage. ) 71r-) �lJr' _4V, J; F 4WCS 7��� � Agce 6. Names and addresses of witnesses doctors_ _andnospitals CC - (�,'�� y�y 131�lier_f C'A Sfi�� y Sr✓1/;ZA L �t ''- ���' f,�A.ti�.EiSri� A+v? �}'/7 c7 CUr�rJ�. -- — --- ----=------- -------------------------T-----------------r---- J. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or lnJury: LAT ITEM AMOUNT s t 1 t A /56 yie� / Clijrtir�yE /�.Q�s �� Govt. Code Sec. 910.2 provides : "The claim signed by the claimant SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) or by some person on his behalf. " Name and Address of Attorney Adnt s ignature lir � ,eA�S�SCD ddre s 9_11101Telephone No. /©7Q Telephone No. NOTICE Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: "Every person h-ho, -with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, ' or to any county, town, city district, ward or village board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account, voucher , or writing, is guilty of a felony. " Aou/ 64 1221V Zc�s l'oolle./I /�x "I'Vo4c,160 Ae6 Afewka�� w,4 741)f W 0/,7 r116 0/y Tx,&�Iuee Zc X ,�ys tc-fee /4�,C-. 16Y Xle c/ocle'e- CLAIM •BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements,, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to GovernnTnir..�Cgde Amount: $1, 000, 000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all °Warnings°, y Cvuri,, l CLAIMANT: CHLOE CALONGNE AUG 1 3 1987 c/o Riess & Riess ATTORNEY: 1460 Maria Lane #320r✓larirrr; z, 0A Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Date received ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 4, 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: August 3 , 1987 Certified P 057 335 034 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. fibIL BATCHELOR, Clerk -. DATED: August 12, 11987 : Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors KThis claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( } This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply'for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: BY: .nils / eputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOk ARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present This Claim isrejected in full. ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: SEP 11987 Gi c-�- -- PHIL BATCHELOR Clerk, By � Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail -to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: S E P 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by Deputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator 1 Riess & Riess 1460 Maria Lane, Suite 320 2 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (415) 944-1970 3 �4 Attorneys for Chloe Calongne G 6 Chloe Calongne 4 A 7 Claimant, , 8 vs. 9 Contra Costa County, 10 Public Entity. 11 12 Chloe Calongne hereby presents this claim to the COUNTY OF 13 CONTRA COSTA pursuant to section 910 et. seq. of the California 14 Government Code. 15 1 . The name and post office address of claimant is: 16 Chloe Calongne 4220 Clayton Road, Apt. 2103 17 Concord, CA 94521 18 2 . All correspondence and notices regarding this claim 19 should be directed to the law offices of Riess & Riess , 1460 Maria 20 Lane, Suite 320, Walnut Creek, CA 94596. 21 3 . On June 11, 1987 at Clayton Road near its intersection 22 with Cape Code Way, claimant sustained personal injuries when she 23 fell while exiting from a Central Contra Costa County Transit 24 Authority bus when she stepped into a hole in the sidewalk owned 25 and maintained by Contra Costa County. 26 4. Claimant fell to the sidewalk and twisted her right 27 ankle and sustained various other serious bodily injuries. 28 1 1 5. The names of the public employees responsible for these 2 circumstances are not currently known. 3 6. Claimant has incurred medical expenses, and will 4 continue to incur medical expenses in the future, in an amount not 5 yet determined. Claimant has also sustained pain, suffering and a 6 loss of earning potential as a result of this accident. The 7 amount claimed as of the date of presentation of this claim is 8 $1,000 , 000. 9 Dated: AU Ste en Riess 10 Attorney for Calongne 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 I PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL 2 I, Steven Riess, declare: 3 I am a resident of Contra Costa County, California. I am 4 over the age of eighteen years and I am not a party to the within 5 action. My business address is 1460 Maria Lane, Suite 320, Walnut 6 Creek, California 94596. On the date indicated below I served the 7 attached document indicated below on all parties of record in this 8 action by placing a true copy enclosed in a sealed envelope with 9 postage fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Walnut Creek, 10 California addressed as follows: 11 12 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors CERTIFIED - RETURN RECEIPT 651 Pine Street, Room 106 P 057 335 034 13 Martinez, CA 94553 14 Central Contra Costa Transit Authority CERTIFIED - RETURN RECEIPT 2477 Arnold Industrial Way P 057 335 035 15 Concord, CA 94520 16 Document: GOVERNMENT TORT CLAIM 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the 26 State of California that the foregoing itvenRiess/ and correct. 27 Dated: � 4-1-`f S 28 CLAIM /(J SnARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $ 5 , 000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warniizgp4`ntY COUnsd1 CLAIMANT: Kathy Lapin �11(� 1987 c/o Theodore 0. Berry ATTORNEY: Law Office of Michael Weisberg Mai— nez. CA 94552' 1610 Harrison Street Date received ADDRESS: Oakland, CA 94612 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 6, 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: not legible I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: August 13 , 1937 JaIL Bep�tyLOR, Clerk L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (X� This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Ali Dated: �'� BY: Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOX ARRD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present This Claim is rejected in full. ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. SEP 1 1987 Dated: PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, ByC Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated; SEP 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR byuty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator 1 Law offices of YiL J Michael Weisberg 2 1610 Harrison Street ��� Oakland, California 94612 R AT M 3 (415/839-7733 4 Attorneys for 5 6 7 8 In the matter of the claim of 9 KATHY LAPIN 10 TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: 11 You are hereby notified that Kathy Lapin, dob 9/11/58, does hereby 12 present this claim for injuries and damage as set forth hereinafter. 13 On June 10, 1987, Kathy Lapin was an inmate of the Contra Costa County 14 Jail, Martinez, California, housed in F module. At approximately 2:15 p.m. 15 of that date, claimant was injured when she fell in the hallway which provides 16 access from F module to the supply closet next to the laundry room. At the 17 time of her injury, claimant was part of a work party consisting of inmates 18 who were directed to clean the area. A part of their function was to retrieve 19 supplies such as soap, mops, etc. , necessary to do the cleaning. Ordinarily 20 such supplies would have been brought by the supply clerk, an inmate. However, 21 on this particular date, the supply clerk was not on duty and therefore it 22 was necessary for claimant to secure supplies herself. After proceeding 23 about six feet into the hallway, claimant fell, landing on the small of her 24 back. She was bruised in the area where the impact occured. 25 In response to claimant 's fall, a nurse appeared on the scene and 26 instructed claimant to go to her room, which claimant did. The nurse, whose -1- 1 identity is unknown at this time, treated claimant by application of an ice 2 ba Claimant was ordered to have bed rest two days and g. y given a muscle 3 relaxant. Claimant was not seen by or treated by a physician nor were X-rays 4 taken or any other sort of diagnostic methods employed to ascertain the extent 5 of claimant 's injuries. 6 At the present time, claimant 's damages are in the sum of $5,000.00. 7 However, the exact nature and extent of claimant 's injuries are not known 8 and therefore claimant reserves the right to increase the amount of her claim 9 in the event the facts substantiate such an increase. 10 All notices regarding this claim should be sent to claimant 's attorneys 11 as set forth below: 12 Theodore 0. Berry 13 Law Office of Michael Weisberg 1610 Harrison Street 14 Oakland, Ca 94612 15 Theodore 0. Berry 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ,aw offices of —2— Wichaei Weisberg '610 Harrison Street )akland,California 94612 41SI 839-7733 CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT S eD t emb er 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $1, 000, 000, 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnings". CLAIMANT: DAVID CORRAL County Counsel c/o Justin A. Roberts , Esq AUG 131987 ATTORNEY: 990 Moraga Road SEC Lafayette, CA 94549 Date received Martin CA 94553 ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 6 , 198 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: July 28 , 1987 Certified P 504 138 985 1. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: August 13 , 1937 JAIL BATTCHELOR, Clerk L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (- This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: BY: �I�G�LC��i/� /�fl[T� Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present ( ' ) This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. A'f Dated: SEP 1 198 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By V GC-G Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: SEP 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by , uty Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator � Chu LAW OFFICES OF ��ji JUSTIN A. ROBERTS ✓414 . CCV� JURTI\A.ROBERTR 990 MORAGA ROAD, SUITE C 4 TEt:E�Tx }�F POST OFFICE BOX 876 ��% 4i61 RTF.PHFN.l.PURT11A, LAFAYETTE,CALIFORNIA 94549 ;- RO July 28 , 1987 CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 504 138 985 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Hospital Administrator Merrithew Memorial Hospital and Clinics RECEI'�' 2500 Alhambra Avenue Martinez, California 94553 Re : David Corral C 1L8� ow D Dear Sir/Madam: David Corral hereby makes claim against Merrithew Memorial Hospital and Clinics for the sum of One Million Dollars ($19000,000.00) A d makes the following statements in support of his claim: a. Claimant' s address is 1918 Dunn Avenue, Richmond, California 94801 . b. Notices concerning the claim should be sent to the Law Offices of Justin A. Roberts, c/o Justin A. Roberts, Esq. , 990 Moraga Road, Suite C, Lafayette, California 94549. Telephone : (415 ) 283-4880. C . The date and place of the occurrence giving rise to this claim are that in or about August, 1986, claimant, David Corral, was admitted to Merrithew Memorial Hospital and Clinics for an operation commonly referred to as a right inguinal herniorraphy, i.e, a hernia operation . At said time and place and all times thereafter, agents and/or employees of Merrithew Memorial Hospital and Clinics failed to properly examine, diagnose, test, treat, or otherwise tend to the condition of claimant, David Corral in a manner consistent with the standard of care. As a proximate result of said failure of examination, diagnosis, testing and treatment, claimant, David Corral, has suffered damage to the nerves and surrounding tissues, or other structures, and other damages, to and related to claimant' s mid- section and body. Claimant had no way of discovering that said damage was caused by said agents and/or employees of Merrithew Memorial Hospital and Clinics until on or after April 20, 1987 , when claimant retained other health care professionals and was i Hospital Administrator Merrithew Memorial Hospital and Clinics July 28, 1987 Page Two Re : David Corral advised at that time that the surgery above referenced had caused damage to his nerves, and related structures in the area of the hernia operation . d. A general description of the injury or damage includes serious and severe pain and suffering of the mid- section caused by severing of nerves, nerve tissue, and surrounding structures, inability to move normally and other damages, including inability to function normally, work, and enjoy life . e . The name or names of the public employee or employees causing the injury, damage or loss are not known at present. f. The amount of this claim is One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) . The basis of the above amount includes medical expenses to date, future medical expenses, loss of wages, future loss of wages, and all special and general damages as allowed by law. all ustin A. Ro erts n Behalf of Claimant David Corral JAR:cv CLAIM /I If BOARD OF SUPERVI`;ORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Governrn�qp�j CollnSC� Amount: $100, 000 . 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnings". CLAIMANT: NANETTE WENS (SIJ h 13 1987 c/o John J. Hartford, Attorney at Law w2i,irtirlt'Z, C:A %4-` ':J`:% ATTORNEY: 51 James Avenue Redwood City, CA 94064 Date received August 12 , 1987 ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON BY MAIL POSTMARKED: August 4, 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. August 14, 1937 HHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED g PpBY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors This claim complies subst ntia11 w/i`t!�h�i ections 91100rCa�'nd 910.2. CzJ 5`6p W'CL 616"ZI ( ) This claif FAILS to comply sub'stan is ly with Sec ns 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). Claim is not timely filed. The Cle►�k should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: By: eputy County Counsel U � III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) KClaim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present This Claim is rejected in full. ( ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. SEP 11987 Dated: PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By = Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. SEP 2 1987 Dated: BY; PHIL BATCHELOR byZZ4Z_L_===Deputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator 1 JOHN J. HARTFORD Attorney at Law 2 51 James Avenue Post Office Box 1207 3 Redwood City, CA 94064 Telephone : (415) 366-7000 4 i Attorney for Plaintiff 5 I I 6 i 7 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA i I 10 i i 11 NANETTE WEEMS , ) CLAIM FOR DAMAGES 12 Claimant, ) I 13 vs . ) 14 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, ) fAMR] CEIVED OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ) f 15 ATTORNEY FOR THE COUNTY ) / 198 i OF CONTRA COSTA, AND ) {�� 16 RELATED PERSONS AND ENTITIES , w oa I 17 Respondents . 18 19 Claimant NANETTE WEEMS hereby makes claim against the i 20 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA and the OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR i 21 THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA for the sum of $100 , 000 and makes the 22 following allegations in support of this Claim : i 23 1 . The address of Claimant is 6103 San Jose Avenue, i 24 Richmond, California 94804 . 25 2 . All notices regarding this Claim should be serlt to i 26 JOHN J . HARTFORD, Attorney at Law, 51 James Avenue, P. O. Box 1201 , 27 Redwood City, California 94064 . fJH: tc 28 3 . The dates of the occurrences giving rise to this i I -1- 1 Claim are various but relate to the assertion by Respondents of an 2 invalid claim to certain Social Security payments in the amount of 3 $340 . 00 monthly and certain child support payments in the amount of 4 $239 . 00 monthly as per the letters from Respondents dated July 9, 5 1987 , June 11, 1987 , and April 3, 1987 , true copies of which are 6 attached hereto as Exhibits A, B, and C, respectively, and incor- 7 porated herein by reference . In short, Respondents have unlawfully, ! i 8 arbitrarily, and capriciously made said assertions in willful , 9 intentional , oppressive, fraudulent, and malicious derogation of 10 the rights of Claimant as announced by the Supreme Court of the Stat' f These rights 11 o California in In re Jerald C. , 36 Cal . 3d 1 (1984) . es g 12 were recently summarized in County of San Mateo v. Jensen, 87 Daily 13 Journal D.A. R. 4524 (7/28/87) , a true copy of which is attached 14 hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by reference . 15 4 . The damages suffered by Claimant consist of severe 16 emotional distress and mental anguish with regard to which Claimant 17 has required and will require the services of health care providers , I 18 the expense for which i' - included in the damages sought herein. 19 The damages suffered by 'Claimant are those damages which would i 20 naturally flow from the unlawful taking of support payments other.- 21 wise payable to an impoverished person such as Claimant but also j 22 include the support payments referred to in Exhibits A, B, and C. j 23 5. The names of the public employees causing the injuries I 24 and damages to Claimant are unknown to Claimant other than the 25 persons signing the originals of Exhibits A, B, and C. - 26 6 . The Claim as of this date is in the total amount of 27 $100 , 000 . 00 calculated as follows : 28 i -2- 1 a. Severe emotional distress and related injuries in the 2 amount of $90 , 000 . 00 ; 3 b. Support payments in the monthly total of $579 . 00; andl 4 C. The balance to $100 , 000 . 00 for punitive damages and 5 other special and general damages . 6 7 . The basis for computation set forth above is tentative 7 only and Claimant reserves the right to, in the event that this 8 Claim is rejected, seek such other and additional amounts as are 9 appropriate including punitive damages based on such other and 10 further legal theories as are appropriate under the facts and 11 circumstances . The foregoing description of the Claim is absolutel 12 without prejudice to the right of Claimant to amend this Claim as 13 appropriate under the facts and circumstances . 14 15 Dated : August 2 , 1987 JOHN J. HARTFORD 16 Attorney for Claimant 17 I 18 I 19 20 21 i 22 23 i 24 25 26 I 27 28 I -3- 40 P.1uir Rcau .)trice of District Attorney Contra =F 3 ;a:y T. Yanzey Costar ;S;nC Attorney ( ] ACiv1RJL,T.,�t7!Ci�! county )�� ) �-vL!_EGTICINS m a !y Support Division ( ) LEEEGAL WELF;\RE (i��,;li. Douglas Pipes e or Deputy h:,trict Attorney 1 r r.: July 9, 1987 Mrs. Nanette Weems, 6103 San Jose Avenue Richmond, Dear Ms. Wcr ;;ts In reply ✓J j'Oli.: t .i.%'L , l . .- t .' t i•?r .. . A-11 :l'- GUI aCC it t:. �4.- Vi']: :? �}.,...- 1•., t.. 1 The county is _ ayi-nq $" 04 5. OU '.-r MO!!'C .!.L !'- ,?lacement. T}, SUc?.al c.,-oL-],t'•i 1F; �!i'3�'.:l: l . ^;lC inq 4t . •)ii U11 t a'- rci.:nw :r trt.:..,: 1:,i..a . ,:t: . 4 i, tJ ,eiu the .�:t:t.].. _ .:-i r• .. ::I! i . - ! { .. ..i ..!A: EXHIBIT A �w mu�� n )ffice ,of District Attorney ontra Martinez, California 94553 . (415)372- 4883 iry T. Yancey Costa ( J ADMINISTRATION strict AttorneyCOUnty ( J COLLECTIONS Imily Support Division (:X) LEGAL ( J WELFARE FRAUD Douglas Pipes -nior Deputy District Attorney rector June 11, 1987 Mrs . 1vanette Weeas 6103 Jose Avenue RicCA glls��t4 Dear i-!2,S. .•seems This will acknowledge receipt of your hand-delivered letter of June °, r 1907 PuI'Si.ai:-_ tJ 1.1elfai'e and Institutions Code 41141 I'lai , your child , iiVi?'^c Weems , :-ir:hts of support from her father , David C . Weems , were assigned to CcI "? Costa County as a matter of law When ilonica received publ i.-- assi- ._._- - :'rolr. _ :,laa'� Costa "ounty. Thu- , a, .. o' . . Wee:!:s ' child s.11.1--,e t;lat date 1)t i--c' e .i C'•_??t -a C.U:;t6 Co .. Mr. l;eE:.S ' order oi' support obligates him to pay �,,239.00 child Pei' 11!C;'. :? for 1-1C)1 " „ 'rbel' J`S , ;:•_ lriaS 1:.11 I :L-he i ul�. 11Ca . �ilI?:'e lv9, e.i O'(' am _,a:;. In only t,,._ the months . The D1 St•? LnU17tj' , = I°'1' - "_', 1S 7_!t?S1Gl:` i(jytbe 2319 0j T!ei ]aOnt:"1 o_ the amoun'9 VULl have :-11'1-�72" ;!USI-Y reL e1':ea It is c-ear that you disagree With our ir?terpret iLi,. :n of ti:e detel'l;!111atic—) of thisSilk', hi.)'i: OI)%;t �;. .-•... ';77..,_.i. !: !-!... ..l'!, �. Seni r—I.-'uty District ,'.ttorney i D i i' L1)= 1: r'A au hhm Road Df,fire` Qf District A.tterrley Contra flarlrnat. Cahlornia D4557 { t'II�)X72 11183 ivy T. Yancey Costa ( ) ADMINISTRATION ),smct Anornuy Y ( ( COLLECTIONS Count (X I LEGAL gamily Support DWISO!1 ( j WELFARE FRAUD _. Douglas Pipes ienlor Dup„ly D,',InCI Attorney ),ruCtor r April 3, 1931 ! L.. j.. '1: �L,L.u! t: .rnr 'It P 1 'wAI > i i:IVw 0H i,rn •1 ;C,, or LK chi W SUpl, VL •rl:l• M'.Cr. has Cni I a'l-uo ,l! Y••:i: 1,1 2 ud i it it r:i'111,I y rhn I i 1 t y 01. WOK--!, , . ., , .., ' c'(I: id .:'!ppni't. r•'l',r'metiLS .,. re Uppi ir'.1 L:.7 1'J1mbilli-SU I ch C 1' .." ,., I l'.r• „_ Co 11;! 1 '.71 .,�' ;!I' r_I! ! ir.I :!.; �71 �i.,li,illl',r i � i'r;i•!• . ,1'L impnen L_, u [ 't.no I'r IiI'71, ,1: rl•an It l'•:id ',:� w 11L,,f i' , . .� ,.I'.. .,1'L (:c.,,!� I'•tlt'::!!u,. r '.11�_ :'r`i: L ;1 � l�)f; i.. 'i: ;, 4:•_vin� L7; ], :; " . ..'r, 11 t. ,'1! , I.. . Illri.,)I'i. �., 1.1 _....•" � rti. ' ,.. I i ...', .,:! I il,.;i iIlit p :7- i,ir • ,iii , � ;�. .,Li .'n t�!• !:L';. 'I; ',i: .,.. ' .;,I}:17r,r ;' 7 . I !'� .. ... •nl.!r i � I'i .,, ,I I ., .I, .r!„ ,. ..•. �� .. ..; I: _. .;r,: � I rI: 1 I �' I� •II Irl .,rill f,�i'I � �. � i !I 1 •.i il:l,l 1,.. .,II. il,.�l L,,:LIIi id .111',,,,•"11 0! . .. r. - t' „ _ .1 .. ..1,J ..i! ,1.;. ., ,�L•r.l._. t.:i ',.._.,I ., 1.111' .. it ' !l i o . OK 1 hay llr.::'•: l,l'o'l1 moI f ,r n! ZI "I A5 l t1J:r 1*: I 1,'-t iced y.1111' r. :L'1, I"it, i1 ';lat1',7'. a:;.,lt!lll�ll.'fIL . At; ..li r. ! i,aL � � .1986 , Ltd ,lllt!i%,i_ Aid not Vrltur the Prljr!flc`MLO by wage ! wn1, Ilii':'•'_ . ic! .Ii .,l•e, 1.11• . t•1:!C L.11,t.'., I;C I•!,i i l l i l L c d LIIC' pr n v1,.111s W I V.. ...,..,1.,!�UIIC'111. . >r ?!rs. Weems 2 April. 3, 1937 We apologize for any inconvenience this situation may have cnuspd you . if' y6u have further questions, please feel free to contact Kim Co.lunrn , the Collections Officer assigned to your case. Very truly yours, CARY T. YANCEY District Attorney I.. K 'kr. , A rip,.; p,.; Enclosuref; :c : Suparvisor Tom Powers pailU �ppellale Fepart Tuesday, July 28`, 19 when the affected party voluntarily appears after acceptance of the dissolution of the marriage or the legal separation of the parties,...no modifica service of-notice b his attorney,whereas Gortner suggests"seta of such Judgment,order,or decree,and no subsequent order in such proceedings s Y Y, be valid unless any prior notice otherwise required to be given to a party to al notice"is sufficient if combined with only'`technical failure"to proceeding be served,in such manner as such notice is otherwise permitted by'taw tc comply with section 4809. We readily concur with Ruszovan and served,upon the party himself.For such purpose,service upon the attorney of rrc shall not be sufficient."(Emphasis added.) Ashren,that a voluntary appearance by the affected party consti- unless otherwise indicated,all further statutory references are to the Civil Co. totes a waiver of service on him,when his attorney has previously S.The letter contains no reference to the January z7 hearing date. accepted service of an adequate notice as well, There hardly can be any doubt that the party has received sufficient"actual notice" 6.This determination makes unnecessary our review of the record as to evidence "actual notice" and "technical" failure. We tate, however, that there is dispute of the pending proceeding. evidence of an initial direction to serve Mathews;there is no proof of service of notice r We have difficulty, however, concurring with Gortner's sug- appellant;there is no indication that Mathews forwarded the notice served to appellan the notice served on Mathews specified a January 8 bearing slate; and, there is r geStion,Gortner does not,for example, indicate the content of the erhaindication that either Mathews or appellant kw in advance of the January 27 hearin " knew actual notice"to which a pprty is entitled.It is,perhaps,trite for date. This lack of facts showing actual notice, coupled with Gottschalk's apparer us to hold,as we now do,that any such notice should be adequate: concession of defective service in his January 22 letter to appellant, leave the tria It should be sufficiently in advance of the hearing date and should court's finding of waiver without evidentiary,support,in any event. include that date and the time,place,and purpose of the hearing. In addition, Gortner does not specify what type of "failure" to Trial Court: comply with section 4809 is so"technical"as not to invalidate an Superior Court, County of Humboldt order. That dictum cites as authorities Lewis v. Lewis (1957) 49 Trial Judge: Cal.2d 389, 396, and Leverett v. Superior Court (1963) 222 Ca- Charles Al. Thomas. Jr. I.App.2d 126,134.Both of these opinions hold that"(a)etual notice Attorney for Appellant: is sufficient" (Lewis at p. 396 and Leverett at p. 134), and cited several constitutional law decisions. Neither opinion, however, Francis . 1325 Mathews P.O. Box. considers the requirements of section 4809, for the good reason Eureka, CA 95501 that both decisions preceded enactment of predecessor statute (section 147) in 1963. Attorneys for Respondent: In view of recurrent uncertainty of what constitutes adequate Gottschalk & Sanders "actual notice" and similar uncertainty as to what failure to 417 Second Street, Suite 5 comply with section 4809 is only a"technical"failure,we arrive at Eureka, CA 95501 what the Legislature could hardly have expressed more clearly when It enacted section 4809; No subsequent order is valid unless the requisite notice is served "upon the party himself" and that "service upon the attorney of record shall not be sufficient." GOVERNMENT We now apply these principles to the facts of the present case. Although section 4809 provides for no waiver, or other exception, Cite as 87 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4524 we have accepted the holdings of Ruszovan and Askren that a party's voluntary appearance, in combination with previous ac- COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, ceptance of service of an adequate notice by his attorney, consti- Plaintiff-Respondent, totes a waiver. In the present case, however, appellant did not v appear and there is no Ruszovan waiver. DLLL WARD JENSEN, et al., We are left,therefore,with the precise problem which section Defendants-Appellants. 4809 was intended to solve. The statutory language could not be more clear in providing that a party must be served a notice of a No. A032125 modification proceeding. We decline to create or uphold excep- Super. Ct. No. 269050 tions to the statute which open the door to factual disputes offer California Court of Appeal oral communications between counsel and often hostile parties. First Appellate District Respondent's clearly appropriate course of action here was to Division One have served appellant. Her attorney's failure to comply with the Filed July 23, 1987 statute left appellant without the statutory notice of the hearing to The County of San Mateo (hereafter respondent or the Colin- which he is entitled.'We are compelled to invalidate the resulting ty) filed an action against appellants,parents of a minor declared order. a ward of the juvenile court (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) and The order of March 26, 1986,is reversed; and, the trial court is committed to a group home,seeking child support and reimburse- directed to make its order granting appellant's motion to vacate. ment of Aid to Families of Dependent Children(hereafter AFDC) Appellant is entitled to costs on this appeal, funds used to support the minor child. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § HOLMDAHL, J. 11350.)' We concur: On August 20, 1984, the superior court was requested to take ELKINGTON, Acting P.J. judicial notice of the pleadings in both the juvenile court case NEWSOM, J. which had resulted in the commitment of the minor to the Stockton 1.The Donee of appeal aLsospecifies the court's order denying Hoden's C«le of civil Children's Home and the present action for reimbursement. On Preceduresection 110.6 motion to disqualify the judge.This order is not discussed in the September 23, 1984, appellants moved for judgment (Code Civ. appellant's briefs on appear;thus,we decline to consider this point.(5'ounger v.State of Proc., §631.8), and asked that certain matters be deemed admit- Caufonla (1962) 137 W.App.3d 8%,812-813.) ted due to the County's alleged failure to adequately respond to 2.The record contains no indication that Gottschalk told Mathews about the January requests for admission. The court refused to deem the matters 27 hearing date. admitted,but granted appellants'motion to have the requests for S. The record contains no indication that Co(lschalk told appellant about the admissions, the County's responses thereto, and subsequently January 27 hearing date, _ filed notices of default made part of the record. 4.Scam.^. i&✓;-n ides,in reirvnnt pert:"After the entry of:i judgment decreeing The court declined to render judgme i,all evidence had 01T 0 S� „iy, July 28, 1987 4525 -------------- been presented.At the close of the County's case in chief,the court while here the County seeks to recover AFDC benefits under ordered submission of further written points and authorities, and authority of section 1I350—and second,the fact that appellants' toot appellants' motion for judgment under submission. child was placed in a nonsecure,private group home rather than On November 19,1984,the superior court rendered its decision confined in juvenile hall, a secure facility like Jerald C. Respon- denying appellants'motion and awarding judgment to respondent dent stresses that under the current statutory scheme AFDC for$2,511 in arrearages and$93 per month current support as long funds cannot be used to support juveniles confined in secure as the child continues in his current placement. The County's institutions,and thus the placement of appellants'minor in group request for a wage assignment was denied without prejudice. homes was not for the benefit of society as in Jerald C. Commencing November 1, 1985, appellants were ordered to pay The focus of our inquiry must be upon whether the purposes of the sum of $125 per month ($93 current support plus $32 the minor's confinement include the protection of society. (Jerald arrearages.) C.,supra,36 Cal.3d 1,7.) "As we noted in Terminal Plaza Corp.v. Appellants' minor child was declared a ward of the juvenile City and County of San Francisco (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 892, 910: court on August 11, 1982, pursuant to Penal Code section 602. 'The basis for the equal protection violation is that society as a Custody of the minor child was removed from appellant and he whole benefits from the incarceration; ...' 'It is a denial of equal was placed with a juvenile probation officer. The child was not protection when the government seeks to charge the cost of opera- confined to a juvenile detention facility, however. instead,he w,rs tion of a state function,conducted for the benefit of the public,to a placed in the Children's Home of Stockton, and then the EE particular class of persons. (Norwood v.Baker(1898)172 U.S.269, Residential Group Home, both nonsecure facilities. State AFDC 279 et seq. (43 L.Ed. 443, 447 et seq., 19 S.Ct. 187); In re Jerald C. funds were used to support the child. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 1, 6; (201 Cal.Rptr. 342, 678 P.2d 917); Dept. of The trial court awarded respondent reimbursement for the Mental Hygiene v.Kirchner(1964)60 Cal.2d 716,723(36 Cal.Rptr. costs of care of the child pursuant to section 11350,' which man- 488, 388, P.2d 720, 20 A.L.R. 3d 353) (remanded 380 U.S. 194 (13 dates compulsory reimbursement from "the family” of AFDC L.Ed.2d 753,85 S.Ct.870); sub.opn.62(Cal.2d)586(43 Cal.Rptr. funds paid to a foster care facility. (County of Ventura v. Stark 329, 400 F.2d 321, 20 A.L.R. 3d 361).) "To charge the cost of (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 1112, 1117; County of San Mateo v. Booth operation of state functions is conducted for public benefit to one (1982) 135 Cal.App.3d 388,397.) The central issue presented in this class of society is arbitrary and violates the basic constitutional appeal is whether collection from appellants of the AFDC funds guarantee of equal protection of law. (Citation.)"In re Jerald C., used to support their minor child would constitute a violation of supra, 36 Cal.3d at p.6.)' (Cunningham v. Superior Court (1986) the equal protection clause under the principles announced by our 177 Cal.App.3d 336,348 (222 Cal.Rptr.854).)" (County of Marin v. state high court in In re Jerald C. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 1 (hereafter Pezok (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 1441, 1445.) Jerald C.). Although the reasons underlying placement of appellants' In Jerald C.,supra,the minor child was declared a ward of the minor child were the subject of some controversy at the trial,the juvenile court pursuant to section 602, placed in custody at juve- legal basis for the commitment is undisputed. The minor was nile hall, and subsequently committed to the California Youth initially referred to the juvenile court because of emotional distur- Authority. (36 Cal.3d at p. 4.) The County of Santa Clara sought bance and his sexual molestation of a sibling. He subsequently reimbursement pursuant to section 903 (prior to its amendment). committed a violation of Vehicle Code section 10852 (unlawful While acknowledging that "(s)tatutes requiring responsible rela- taking of a vehicle without consent of the owner),which led to his tives to reimburse governmental agencies for support have been becoming a ward of the Court..."The commitment was pursuant sustained against claims of denial of equal protection" (id.at p.5; to section 602 and, according to the probation officer in charge of citing Swoap v. Superior Court (1973) 10 Cal.3d 490, and in re placement, was for three reasons: protection of the public; reha- Ricky Il. (1970) 2 Cal.3d 513), the court observed: "However, bilitation of the minor, and protection of the family. relative responsibility statutes have been invalidated when the Thus,among the obvious objectives served by the placement government charges were not for support which the relative.. was the protection of society from possible future criminal acts by refused but for the cost of maintaining public institutions for the minor. His rehabilitation also benefits society, even as it public benefit... (Paras.) The cases have reasoned that when indirectly promotes the protection of his family. A second critical incarceration or commitment is for the protection of society, it is factor is the involuntary nature of the placement, which resulted arbitrary to assess the relatives for the expense." (Jerald C., directly from juvenile proceedings rather than voluntary or con- supra, 36 Cal.3d at p. 6.) sensual actions on the part of the parents.Nor was it due,as far as Relying on its earlier decision in I)ept. of Menial Hygiene v. we can tell from the record,to any failure or refusal by appellants Kirchner (1964) 60 Cal.2d 716, 720, the court concluded that the to provide support for their child. purposes of confinement and treatment or care in commitments pursuant to section 602 encompass " 'the protection of society The fact that respondent seeks reimbursement of AFDC funds from the confined person.... Hence the cost of maintaining; the pursuant to sedtion 11350 is no basis for distinguishing Jerald C. state institution, including provision of adequate care for its in- from the present case.As we recently observed in County of Marin mates,cannot be arbitrarily charged to one class of society,such v. Pezok, supra, 190 Cal.App.3d 1441, 1445-1446, "it is the purpose assessment violates the equal protection clause.' " (In re Jerald and derivation of the commitment rather than the source of the C.,supra, 36 Cal.3d at p. 8; see also Pennell v. City of San Jose funds used to pay for it which is dispositive in an equal protection (1986) 42 Cal.3d 365, 372.) Additionally, the court recognized that analysis." Here, as in Pezok, the commitment resulted from "the common law duty to support minor children does not autho- commission of criminal acts and was imposed under section 602 rize the state to recover the costs of confinement imposed for the for the benefit of the public. (Ibid; see also County of Merced v, protection of society and the minor and his rehabilitation." (In re Dominguez (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 1513, 1517.) And the fact that Jerald C.,supra,36 Cal.3d at p. 10; see also County of Ventura v. Children's Home of Stockton and EE Residential Group Home are Stark (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 1112, 1118.) not secure facilities does not alter the essential purpose of the detention to protect the public. (Id.at pp. 1517-1518.)Accordingly, Respondent seeks to distinguish Jerald C. from the case at under the compulsion of Jerald C.,we conclude that the County is bench on two grounds: first, the statutory basis for reimburse- precluded from obtaining reimbursement from appellants for the ment — in Jerald C., section 903 was declared unconstitutional, AFDC funds used to care for their minor child. (Ibid.)' r auk ppeunic cport Tuesday, July 28, 19 / Appellants also request an award 61-attorney's fees and costs v pursuant to Code of Civil procedure section 1021.5. Without sup- SUPERIOR COURT OF SOLANO COUNTY, porting argument,they merely offer the summary argument that Respondent, their action has conferred a "significant benefit, both pecuniary JEROME RAPOZA et al., and nonpecuniary," on the general public. Real Parties in Interest. We disagree. All benefits conferred by this litigation were No. A038M private rather than public. Appellants have merely furthered Super. Ct. No. 92671 their own pecuniary interests by successfully challenging the California Court of Appeal County's right to reimbursement. Lack of a significant public First Appellate District benefit thus defeats appellants' claim to attorney's fees under Division Four Terminal Plaza Corp.v.City and County of San Francisco,supra, Filed July 23, 1987 177 Cal.App.3d 892, 914; Jutkowltz v. Bourns, supra, 118 Ca- Petitioner Campos Food Fair has filed a timely challeni 1.App.3d 102, 113. The judgment is reversed. Appellants' request for attorney's to an order denying its motion for summary judgment (Cox fees is denied. Costs on appeal are awarded to appellants. Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (b).) We agree that the motif should be granted. NEWSON, J. Jerome Rapoza and Jennifer Rapoza, real parties We concur: interest herein, filed an action against petitioner arising o RACANELLI, P.J. of an injury to Mr. Rapoza which occurred when he w. HOLMDAIU., J. servicing refrigeration equipment on the roof of petitioner 1.All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions code unless premises. Real parties allege that petitioner maintain otherwise ladicated. unsafe premises and petitioner takes the position that N 2.In pertinent pari,section 11350 stales:"In any case of separation...of a parent or Rapoza's negligence was the sole cause of his injury. pwvob tram a child...which results in aid under this chapter(Chapter 2)being granted Petitioner noticed a motion for summary judgment on t to surb family,the noncustodial parent or Parents shall be obliged to the county for an ground that real parties' exclusive remedy is under worker amount equaJ to: ... (b)The amount of aid paid to the family during such period of aeparsidw...hmhad by such parent's reasonable ability to pay during that period in compensation. In support of the motion, petitioner offer wfildf aid was granted;....7be district attorney shall take appropriate action pursuant evidence that at the time of the injury Mr. Rapoza W to this aectim in the superior court of the county which provided aid under this chapter." employed by Jerry's Refrigeration and that neither 11 3.In Uhl of this conclusion,we Deed not address appellants'contention that the trial Rapoza nor Jerry's Refrigeration had a contractor's lieen court erred by denying their request to have certain matters deemed admitted. Petitioner cited Blew v. Horner (1986) 187 Ca1.App.3d 1380 which the court held that an unlincensed contractor cannot Trial Court: an independent contractor for purposes of workers' comp San Mateo Superior Court sation but he and his employees are employees as a mat! Trial Judge: of law of the person hiring the work done. They cant Honorable James L. Browning maintain a civil action for damages at the workplace t Attorneys for Plaintiff/ must resort to the exclusive remedy of worke Respondent: compensation. John K. Van de Kamp In response to the motion for summary judgment, r, Attorney General parties pointed out that at the time the complaint was fil- Steve White the case of Blew v. Horner had not been decided. Tt Chief Assistant requested permission to amend the complaint to allege Attorney General cause of action pursuant to section 3706 of the Labor Coe Gloria Deliart This section provides that an injured employee may bring Supervising Deputy action at law against his employer if the "employer fails Attorney General secure the payment of compensation." Furthermore, sect Mary A. Roth 3708 provides that in such an action, negligence of Deputy Attorney Generai employer is presumed and usual defenses to a neglige; 6000 State Building action are not available. San Francisco, CA 94io2 In reply, petitioner argued that even if real parties w permitted to amend their complaint, it was entitled Attorney for Defendants/ summary judgment because it had a workers' compensat Appellants: G policy in full force and effect at the time Mr. Rap,)za John J. Hartford, Esq. injured. A declaration to that effect was attached to S r JH James Avenue reply. P.O. Box 1207 3 3 0 Redwood City, CA 94064 3 J At the hearing, real parties argued that to av, application of section 3706, petitioner would have to sh C, L t ` actual payment of compensation and not merely insuraf �1 coverage. On March 31, 1987, an order was filed providing part: "The Court does not agree that the phrase 'secure ! payment of ly by WORKERS' COMPENSATION maintenance of insura cue iln the abstracctt as' is sated �opposed to Cite as 87 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4526 maintenance of insurance specifically covering plaintiff this action. Only the latter would satisfy the statute." If CA111'OS FOOD FAIR court, citing Blew v. Horner, went on the grant the motiol. Petitioner, the extent that plaintiff was found to be an employee 1 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL [C .C. P. Sections 1013a, 2015 . 5] 2 3 I am a resident of the County of San Mateo and over the age 4 of eighteen years . I am not a party to the within action. My 5 business address is 51 James Avenue , Post Office Box 1207 , 6 Redwood City , California 94064 . 7 On August 3 , 1987 1 served the preceding 8 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES 9 10' 11 12 13 on the parties in said action by placing a true 14 cope thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope , with postage thereon 15 ft:lly prepaid , in the United States mail at Redwood City, 16 California , addressed as follows : 17 Office of the County Clerk County of Contra Costa 18 40 Muir Road . Martinez , CA 94553 19 Mr. L. Douglas Pipes 20 Office of the District Attorney County of Contra Costa 21 40 Muir Road Martinez , CA 94553 22 Board of Supervisors 23 County of Contra Costa 40 Muir Road 24 MartinEiz , JqAN 9J45RRTFORD, declare under penalty of perjury under t 25 the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and I 26 correct, and that this Proof was executed on August 3 , 1987 27 at Redwood City, California . f, t�,.ht,G�a lOtIN 1.liARtf�R 2s JOHN J . HARTFORD I .. CLAIM Ale BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF- CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT September 1 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $100 , 000 . 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnins� °;,;;,�y CQUMCl CLAIMANT: NANETTE WEEMS ,� 1987 c/o John J. Hartford ATTORNEY: Attorney at Law ;f C 51 James Avenue Date received ADDRESS: Redwood City, CA 94064 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON August 6 , 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: August 4, 1987 1. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: August 14, 1987 EVIL BAATTCYELOR, Clerk epuL. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (�Q This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. /v, a'a/ ( ) This' claim FAILS to domply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). Claim is not timely filedA The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: ' BY: // / Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). IV. BOK ARRD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present This Claim is rejected in full. ) Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. 1 `. Dated: SEP 1 1%7 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By L�ld-^E J� Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: SEP 2 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR b De ut Clerk y P y CC: County Counsel County Administrator I `I, JOHN J. HARTFORD II Attorney at Law 2 51 James Avenue Post Office Box 1207 3 Redwood City , CA 94064 Telephone : (415) 366-7000 j 2, i 4 Attorney for Plaintiff 5 ) 6 � i 7 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 10 11 NANETTE WEEMS , ) CLAIM FOR DAMAGES 12 Claimant , ) ) I 13 vs . ) 14 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, ) OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ) 15 ATTORNEY FOR THE COUNTY ) OF CONTRA COSTA, AND ) 16 RELATED PERSONS AND ENTITIES , ) ) 17 Respondents . j 18 19 Claimant NANETTE WEEMS hereby makes claim against the 20 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA and the OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR 21 THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA for the sum of $100 , 000 and makes the 22 following allegations in support of this Claim: i 23 1 . The address of Claimant is 6103 San Jose Avenue, 24 Richmond, California 94804 . 25 2. All notices regarding this Claim should be sent to 26 JOHN J. HARTFORD, Attorney at Law, 51 James Avenue, P.O. Box 1207 , 27 Redwood City, California 94064 . i JJH: tc 28 3 . The dates of the occurrences giving rise to this i i 1 Claim are various but relate to the assertion by Respondents of an 2 invalid claim to certain Social Security payments in the amount of 1 3 $340 . 00 monthly and certain child support payments in the amount of 4 $239. 00 monthly as per the letters from Respondents dated July 9, 5 1987 , June 11 , 1987 , and April 3 , 1987 , true copies of which are 6 attached hereto as Exhibits A, B, and C, respectively, and incor- 7 porated herein by reference. In short, Respondents have unlawfully, 8 arbitrarily, and capriciously made said assertions in willful , 9 intentional , oppressive , fraudulent , and malicious derogation of I 10 the rights of Claimant as announced by the Supreme Court of the Stat 11 of California in In re Jerald C. , 36 Cal . 3d 1 (1984) . These rights 12 were recently summarized in County of San Mateo v. Jensen, 87 Daily i 13 Journal D.A. R. 4324 ( 7/28/87) , a true copy of which is attached 14 hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by reference. 15 4 . The damages suffered by Claimant consist of severe 16 emotional distress and mental anguish with regard to which Claimant 17 has required and will require the services of health care providers, 18 the expense for which is included in the damages sought herein . 19 The damages suffered by Claimant are those damages which would 20 naturally flow from the unlawful taking of support payments other- 21 wise payable to an impoverished person such as Claimant but also 22 include the support payments referred to in Exhibits A, B, and C. 23 5. The names of the public employees causing the injuries' 24 and damages to Claimant are unknown to Claimant other than the 25 persons signing the originals of Exhibits A, B, and C. 26 6. The Claim as of this date is in the total amount of 27 $100 , 000. 00 calculated as follows : i 28 i -2- I a. Severe emotional distress and related injuries in the 2 amount of $90 , 000 . 00 ; 3 b. Support payments in the monthly total of $579. 00; and ; 4 C . The balance to $100, 000 . 00 for punitive damages and 5 other special and general damages . 6 7 . The basis for computation set forth above is tentative 7 only and Claimant reserves the right to, in the event that this 8 Claim is rejected, seek such other and additional amounts as are 9 appropriate including punitive damages based on such other and 10 further legal theories as are appropriate under the facts and 1 11 circumstances . The foregoing description of the Claim is absolutely. 12 without prejudice to the right of Claimant to mend this Claim as i 13 appropriate under the facts and circumstane 14 15 Dated : August 2 , 1987 6W; .' FORD 16 for Claimant i 17 i 18 19 i i 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 i 28 I -3- ✓a r'�Vv-] J `/ i i v 4n MV, Road OffiContra of District Attorney o ltra 1a � 37- 3 i 4 3i S ,,try T. Yancey Costa ( ) Ano!ne; ^ f County =ate: S,p;)Dr: Dl son WELFARE- L. Douglas Pipes De, j:, D •r. Atlornc; July 9, 190" M--S. Nlanette Weer,,c- E,i Ci3 Sar JDse .yv•::; '_:: �.. _ v1_ 7)--a Mc, In repi 1::J C:011ri`, 2'. :>;ay'1:]c� � _, _Ice ,. ..;) - 7!0!?7. \:'i: . 1• ... cme .:r;�IIb_...c. 7:91`.._,. �i. +,,._ , u . .. . 7Z)re ... rc.:ci�. . _.. _ i2":. . EXHIBIT A 40 Muir Road )ffic ' of District Attorney Contra Martinez, California 94553 (415)372- 4883 ary T. yancey Costa [ ] ADMINISTRATION ,t. _ ..• ' nP. Count ( J COLLECTIONS LEGAL jr--::) Su pOrl Div^s, [ ] WELFARE FRAUD Douglas Pipes - Ge u:, Dec?•ic ='�eY -- 19 '7 � .. .... •_JSc .. . .....E :eceiptof your hand-deliverer letter of dune 8, i r s_._.. . e__ a_'e 4.: ;r.stituti_ins Code X11 77(a) , your child, VI--i12 a w ee_7.s , _ _ cf s'_I ,Lor G from her father , David C . G:eeIP.S , were assigned tc _- -. _st _,'anti' as a matter of law whe^ Monica received publ._ aSSl_ _ - _ _... _ I; ?' OSta _ _ ..t; li;.._ , a_1 of viee:`s r chit. .. _`r_ _C �1_,.c' �..�.� dst _ f1- :E beer: ___=ecte� -;�;� _'intra Costa __... Wit. s'appor t obligates him to pay ,?3 .00 child suppor= Since November of 1986, he has __:'t the full '�: : _ 'he r. nth.s. he DiStr� t 4tto1':,e _: Contra _ is _'eSp:..,S4b- e for the dl':'e: S1�2: __ n-_-_ .:lore than the amoun's yc have pre:i usl :ece_ ;ed . 1t _S r th_2-, '-Du d1S 2-ee witty our lnterpretati_ n cf tnE law. 1_ u Will ___.E L, L, determination of this 1SS'1e, yGl. S11C''- obt'. .__ a-- Id1�_ .. Ii _ an-.: u__1S11: of tllat .._ .. :11: _.:_C L. Dcu-s_F5� Pipes Senicr,Deputy District 4ttorney / Direr LD C C . _ �`;bly a'.. tiobert _a-mr)bel_ rti -W Moo !load Jffice of. District Attorney Contra 111tj312. h.483 c cdLlOrnia9455J iary T. Yancey Costa ADMINISTRATION r l COLLECTIONS County (X I LEGAL WELFARE.FRAUD _. Do.,glas Pipes �trdClor " r pri1 3, 1?37 ,,. ._. . _ � . .. � ettc: ,.�, r i .i;:r. .• .'h , i . '::, T li::�-: en,.�lc,... .i � ,.. •, ..1 . . , w•:C }•. ii�:i';i ..I .1 't71,1 :iii, 1� ]t.�' n1. '�C1,7}��?: .. t..l' . , ' I:. �t:1-} ',.'I i._i�/1nE•11:.., ..'t••'t= F:}-j I .� 1 :1 .'�1111}slit':;is t.';, ..,. ' `} .. ... _ .. , L }: :j'i'l,'•. _� i. �". 'r.�. ,,l/ i._, f; ,, .!�. !"1'Cilll T; , . )�} t::� , :']fl(i 1�... . ., ,.. ;, �1 'i 1' .':llit,� t t'�II(�.. ,.:t �. il•_ .:111''I, ,. � ..�". , ]�Jjil , ... �. ., i•!: 1���!(15 U. T. it .1 rr .'llt Ili i.. li{�}•,�1'L ,iy". � � :. I1:.}: ii,1' . ,.. . ... � I •... _.i...`� , ct f. . i"...'t' ;,:1 ! I;.il , l ,i� I� .�... ��.,.IC b ..1('h i-r•',— . � :I - -�!.. i:i }: :}.'� 1� . , ! :'.l.:l'.,'t.: „I��"!• tl t',� :t., lll: :I:...l;'i ... I 'lii i,l i:. . �1:' '• •��:.._: � .;i:'t h; i. ,1.",� �,� ,:'r ...� Ir..., 1 _. 11 .. .� � � .,1. . 1 l 1 I !!. ,. � .l I' o .;•.,.i hn,l 1i'.i'..L1. I,�-',�i Ltlitl. ,�'. .I: \/. i,l I lii�; ;,' ,�:i ,.< �i; i,l t 111•,',I..•il L!rr.: L:, .. . .,1' the ,I•.. .:111•_i, t�Cc:S �)2'ci�l' s.:.;;c•u.:L:: Ltill'"I„'.ir _ �. r .. Ali , ,•.. lJ:., Ile_'y lou✓ ltl'f' /ii,'.1:1y ut't? _•I'u.t A T •- t iIrk i r: '' iced your f,,r :2 wi,f'.e :.ssii nulellt . At ti;" I ..rr:r:;; ,,i' AUL�Iiit "l , 1C'„io, the ,ju,,!r;e .iii nut u1-tier the paylrcrlt.s Ly .w:iL-.e uL;:.i: : _ •: Thcrei%.,re, Hr . Hi,rtineiL ter'Iainated the pr,-viu111 w;,:'.e :.SSj:'.:anr•ll!. . e Mrs. Imems 2 April 3, 2987 nj-!": ize for any inconvenience this situation may have vansod Y-H. if y: n love Further questions , please feel free to contact Kim Colunci , We '03eqtjons OfHoer assigned to your case. Ury truly yours, GHY T. YANCEY bistrict AtUrney n. I 1 j ,".i .1mi, wstrict Attorney :Aq vr'l Wins"re- : cc : visnr Tom Powers 404 prilp tkpr ellafr rpm Tuesday, July 28, 1987 when the affected party voluntarily appears after acceptance of the dissolution of the marriage or the legal separation of the parties,...no modification service of notice by attorney,,whereas Gortner suggests aclu-ests" 0 such judgment,order,or decree,and no subsequent order in such proceedings shall Y be valid unless any prior notice otherwise required to be given to a party to the "technical su al notice"is sufficient if combined with only technical failure"to proceeding be served,in such manner as such notice is otherwise permitted by law to be comply with section 4809. We readily concur with Ruszovan and Served,upon tht party himself.For such purpose,service spot the attorney of record Askren,that a voluntaryappearance b the affected rt consti- akaU not lx otherwise in iEmphasis added.) ppea y party Unless otherwise indicated,all further statutory references arc to the Civil Code tutes a waiver of service on him,when his attorney has previously S.The letter contains no reference to the January 27 baring data. accepted service of an adequate notice as well.There hardly can I Thu determination maks unnecessaryour review of the robed as to evidence of be any doubt that the party has received sufficient"actual notice" .'actual notice" and "technical" failure. e note, however, that there is disputed of the pending proceeding. evidence of an initial direction to serve Mathews;there is no proof of service of notice on We have difficulty, however, concurring with Gortner's sug- appellant;there is no indication that Mathews forwarded the notice Served to appellant gestion,Gortner does not,for example,indicate.the content of the the notice Served on Mathews specified a January I hearing date; and,there is no indication that either Mathews or appellant knew in advance of the January r hearing "actual notice"to which a pprty is entitled.It is,perhaps,trite for date. This lack of facts showing actual notice, coupled with Gottschalk's apparent Us to hold,as we now do,that any such notice should be adequate: concession of defective service in his January 22 Letter to appellant,leave the trial It should be sufficiently in advance of the hearing date and should court's finding of waiver without evidentiary,support,in any event. Include that date and the time,place,and purpose of the hearing. In addition, Gortner does not specify what type of "failure" to Trial Court: comply with section 4809 is so"technical"as not to invalidate an Superior Court, County of Humboldt order. That dictum cites as authorities Lewis v• Lewis (1957) 49 Trial Judge: Cal.2d 389, 396, and Leverett v. Superior Court (1963) 222 Ca- Charles M. Thomas, Jr. 1.App.2d 126,134.Both of these opinions hold that"(a)ctual notice „ Attorney for Appellant: is sufficient (Lewis at p. 396 and Leverett at p. 134), and cited several constitutional law decisions. Neither opinion, however, Francis . Mathews P.O. Box. considers the requirements of section 4809, for the good reason 1325 Eureka, CA 95501 that both decisions preceded enactment of predecessor statute (section 147) in 1963. Attorneys for Respondent: In view of recurrent uncertainty of what constitutes adequate Gottschalk & Sanders "actual notice" and similar uncertainty as to what failure to 417 Second Street, Suite 5 comply with section 4809 is only a"technical"failure,we arrive at Eureka, CA 95501 what the Legislature could hardly have expressed more clearly when it enacted section 4809; No subsequent order is valid unless the requisite notice is served "upon the party himself" and that "service upon the attorney of record shall not be sufficient." GOVERNMENT We now apply these principles to the facts of the present case. Although section 4809 provides for no waiver, or other exception, Cite as 87 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4524 we have accepted the holdings of Ruszovan and Askren that a party's voluntary appearance, in combination with previous ac- COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, ceptance of service of an adequate notice by his attorney, consti- Plaintiff-Respondent, tutee a waiver. In the present case, however, appellant did not v appear and there is no Ruszovan waiver. DELL WARD JENSEN, et al., We are left,therefore,with the precise problem which section Defendants-Appellants. 4809 was intended to solve. The statutory language could not be more clear in providing that a party must be served a notice of a No. A032125 modification proceeding. We decline to create or uphold excep- Super. Ct. No. 269050 tions to the statute which open the door to factual disputes over California Court of Appeal oral communications between counsel and often hostile parties. First Appellate District Respondent's clearly appropriate course of action here was to Division One have served appellant. Her attorney's failure to comply with the Filed July 23, 1987 statute left appellant without the statutory notice of the hearing to The County of San Mateo (hereafter respondent or the Coun- which he is entitled.l We are compelled to invalidate the resulting ty)filed an action against appellants,parents of a minor declared order. a ward of the juvenile court (Welt. & Inst. Code, § 602) and The order of March 26, 1986,is reversed;and,the trial court is committed to a group home,seeking child support and reimburse- directed to make its order granting appellant's motion to vacate. ment of Aid to Families of Dependent Children(hereafter AFDC) Appellant is entitled to costs on this appeal. funds used to support the minor child. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § HOLMDAHL, J. 11350.), We concur: On August 20, 1984, the superior court was requested to take ELKINGTON, Acting P.J. judicial notice of the pleadings in both the juvenile court case NEWSOM, J. which had resulted in the commitment of the minor to the Stockton i.The notice of appeal also specifies the court's order denying Roden's code of civil Children's Home and the present action for reimbursement. On Prooeduee section 170.1 motion to disqualify the judge.This order is not discussed in the September 23, 1984, appellants moved for judgment (Code Civ. appel', is briefs noappeal;thus,we decline to consider this point.(Younger v.state or Proc.,§631.8),and asked that certain matters be deemed admit- c.ur nntt is cti tsf ,alApp.ze cos,$12413.1 ted due to the County's alleged failure to adequately respond to 2.The record contains no indication that Gottschalk told Mathews about the January requests for admission. The court refused to deem the matters V hating date. admitted,but ranted appellants' 3. The record contains no indication that Gottschalk told a llant about the gsres motion a have the requests for Jamary�hearing�� p� admissions, the County's responses thereto, and subsequently filed notices of default made part of the record. t.Sectio.^.4AWJ r-nvides,in relevant part: "After the entry of a judgment decreeing The court declined to render judgme Gl all e idence had Lz i I id . E! 0 thy, July 28, 1987 lailp prllrtr Frpart 452 ------------------- been presented.At the close of the County's case in chief,the court while here the County seeks to recover AFDC benefits under ordered submission of further written points and authorities,and authority of section 11350—and second,the fact that appellants' took appellants' motion for judgment under submission. child was placed in a nonsecure,private group home rather than On November 19,1984,the superior court rendered its decision confined in juvenile hall, a secure facility like Jerald C.Respon- denying appellants'motion and awarding judgment to respondent dent stresses that under the current statutory scheme AFDC for 82,511 in arrearages and 193 per month current support as long funds cannot be used to support juveniles confined in secure as the child continues in his current placement. The County's institutions,and thus the placement of appellants'minor in group request for a wage assignment was denied without prejudice. homes was not for the benefit of society as in Jerald C. Commencing November 1, 1985, appellants were ordered to pay The focus of our inquiry must be upon whether the purposes of the sum of $125 per month (193 current support plus $32 the minor's confinement include the protection of society.(Jerald arrearages.) C.,supra,36 Cal.3d 1,7.)"As we noted in Terminal Plaza Corp.v. Appellants' minor child was declared a ward of the juvenile City and County of San Francisco(1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 892,910: court on August 11, 1982, pursuant to Penal Code section 602. 'The basis for the equal protection violation is that society as a Custody of the minor child was removed from appellant and he whole benefits from the incarceration; ...' 'It is a denial of equal was placed with a juvenile probation officer. The child was not protection when the government seeks to charge the cost of opera- confined to a juvenile detention facility,however; instead,he was tion of a state function,conducted for the benefit of the public,to a placed in the Children's Home of Stockton, and then the EE particular class of persons.(Norwood v.Baker(1m)172 U.S.269, Residential Group Home, both nonsecure facilities. State AFDC 279 et seq. (43 L.Ed.443,447 et seq.,19 S.Ct. 187); In re Jerald C. funds were used to support the child. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 1, 6; (201 Cal.Rptr. 342, 678 P.2d 917); Dept. of The trial court awarded respondent reimbursement for the Mental Hygiene v.Kirchner(1964)60 Cal.2d 716,723(36 Cal.Rptr. costs of care of the child pursuant to section 11350,2 which man- 488, 388, P.2d 720, 20 A.L.R. 3d 353) (remanded 380 U.S. 194 (13 dates compulsory reimbursement from "the family" of AFDC L.Ed.2d 753,85 S.Ct.871));sub,opn.62(Cal.2d)586(43 Cal.Rptr. funds paid to a foster care facility. (County of Ventura v. Stark 329, 400 F.2d 321, 20 A.L.R. 3d 361).) "To charge the cost of (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 1112, 1117; County of San Mateo v. Booth operation of state functions is conducted for public benefit to one (1982) 135 Ca1.App.3d 388,397.) The central issue presented in this class of society is arbitrary and violates the basic constitutional appeal is whether collection from appellants of the AFDC funds guarantee of equal protection of law. (Citation.)"In re Jerald C., used to support their minor child would constitute a violation of supra, 36 Cal.3d at p.6.)' (Cunningham v. Superior Court (1986) the equal protection clause under the principles announced by our 177 Cal.App.3d 336,348 (222 Cal.Rptr.854).)" (County of Marin v. state high court in In re Jerald C. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 1 (hereafter Pezok (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 1441, 1445.) Jerald C.). Although the reasons underlying placement of appellants' In Jerald C.,supra,the minor child was declared a ward of the minor child were the subject of some controversy at the trial,the juvenile court pursuant to section 602, placed in custody at juve- legal basis for the commitment is undisputed. The minor was Wile hall, and subsequently committed to the California Youth initially referred to the juvenile court because of emotional distur- Authority. (36 Cal.3d at p. 4.) The County of Santa Clara sought bance and his sexual molestation of a sibling. He subsequently reimbursement pursuant to section 903 (prior to its amendment). committed a violation of Vehicle Code section 10852 (unlawful While acknowledging that "(s)tatutes requiring responsible rela- taking of a vehicle without consent of the owner),which led to his fives to reimburse governmental agencies for support have been becoming a ward of the Court..."The commitment was pursuant sustained against claims of denial of equal protection"(id.at p.5; to section 602 and, according to the probation officer in charge of citing Swoap v. Superior Court (1973) 10 Cal.3d 490, and In re placement,was for three reasons: protection of the public; reha- Ricky H. (1970) 2 Cal.3d 513), the court observed: "However, bilitation of the minor, and protection of the family. relative responsibility statutes have been invalidated when the Thus,among the obvious objectives served by the placement government charges were not for support which the relative- was the protection of society from possible future criminal acts by refused but for the cost of maintaining public institutions for the minor. His rehabilitation also benefits society, even as it public benefit... (Paras.) The cases have reasoned that when indirectly promotes the protection of his family.A second critical incarceration or commitment is for the protection of society, it is factor is the involuntary stature of the placement, which resulted arbitrary to assess the relatives for the expense." (Jerald C., directly from juvenile proceedings rather than voluntary or con- supra, 36 Cal.3d at p. 6.) sensual actions on the part of the parents.Nor was it due,as far as Relying on its earlier decision in Dept. of Mental Hygiene v. we can tell from the record,to any failure or refusal by appellants Kirchner (1964) 60 Cal.2d 716, 720, the court concluded that the to provide support for their child. purposes of confinement and treatment or care in commitments pursuant to section 602 encompass " 'the protection of society The fact that respondent seeks reimbursement of AFDC funds from the confined person.... Hence the cost of maintaining the pursuant to sedtion 11350 is,no basis for distinguishing Jerald C. state institution, including provision of adequate care for its in- from the present case.As we recently observed in County of Marin mates,cannot be arbitrarily charged to one class of society,such v. Pezok,supra, 190 Cal.App.3d 1441, 1445-1446, "it is the purpose assessment violates the equal protection clause.' " (in re Jerald and derivation of the commitment rather than the source of the C.,supra, 36 Cal.3d at p. 8; see also Pennell v. City of San Jose funds used to pay for it which is dispositive in an equal protection (1966)42 Cal.3d 365,372.) Additionally, the court recognized that analysis." Here, as in Pezok, the commitment resulted from "the common law duty to support minor children does not autho- commission of criminal acts and was imposed under section 602 rine the state to recover the costs of confinement imposed for the for the benefit of the public. (Ibid; see also County of Merced v. protection of society and the minor and his rehabilitation." (in re Dominguez (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 1513, 1517.) And the fact that Jerald C.,supra,36 Cal.3d at p. 10; see also County of Ventura v. Children's Home of Stockton and EE Residential Group Home are Stark (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 1112, 1118.) not secure facilities does not alter the essential purpose of the detention to protect the public.(Id.at pp.1517-1518.) Accordingly. Respondent seeks to distinguish Jerald C. from the case at under the compulsion of Jerald C.,we conclude that the County is bench on two grounds: first, the statutory basis for reimburse- precluded from obtaining reimbursement from appellants for the meat — in Jerald C., section 903 was declared unconstitutional, AFDC funds used to care for their minor child. (Ibid.)' ails peffntr FrFort Tuesday, July 28, 19 �Ants'also request an award of attorney's fees and costs , V. pursuant to Code of Civil procedure section 1021.5. Without sup- SUPERIOR COURT OF SOLANO COUNTY, potting argument,they merely offer the summary argument that Respondent, their action has conferred a "significant benefit, both pecuniary JEROME RAPOZA et M., and nonpecuniary," on the general public. Real Parties in Interest. We disagree. All benefits conferred by this litigation were No. A038M private rather than public. Appellants have merely furthered Super. Ct. No. 9=1 tbeir awn pecuniary interests by successfully challenging the California Court of Appeal County's light to reimbursement. Lack of a significant public First Appellate District benefit thus defeats appellants' claim to attorney's fees under Division Four Terminal Plaza Corp.v.City and County of San Francisco,supra, Filed July 23, 1967 171 Cal.App.3d 892, 914; Jutkowltz v. Bourns, supra, 118 Ca- Petitioner Campos Food Fair has filed a timely challeni l.App.3d 102, 113. The judgment is reversed, Appellants'request for attorney's to an order denying its motion for summary judgment (CO( Civ. Pr fees is denied. Costs on appeal are awarded to appellants. should bee §granted. subd. (b).) We agree that the moth NEWSON, J. Jerome Rapoza and Jennifer Rapoza, real parties We concur: interest herein, filed an action against petitioner arising c RACANELLI, P.J. of an injury to Mr. Rapoza which occurred when he w HOLMDAHL, J. servicing refrigeration equipment on the roof of petitione) 1.All htrtber statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless premises. Real parties allege that petitioner maintain dim in minted. unsafe premises and petitioner takes the position that N t Ia pe3tirrst part neetim u�so staterr:"1n any nae of separation...of a parent or Rapoza's negligence was the sole cause of his injury. pareda from a d AW...which results in aid under this chapter(Cha 2)being granted Petitioner noticed a motion for summary judgment on t to ante family,the noondia!ntoparent a parents shall be obliged to the county for an ground that real parties' exclusive remedy is under worker amaat equal to: ... (b)The amount of aid paid to the family during such period of a aratlm...limited by such parent's reasonable ability to pay during that period in compensation. In support of the motion, petitioner offer whirl old eras graated;....TLe district attorney ahmli take appropriate action pursuant evidence that at the time of the injury Mr. Rapoza w to this sactim is the superior court of the county which provided aid under this chapter." employed by Jerry's Refrigeration and that neither D 7.In agbt al this wrtl .ion,we need not address appellants'contention that the that Rapoza nor Jerry's Refrigeration had a contractor's licen one Barred by eegytog their request to have certain matters deemed admitted. Petitioner cited Blew v. Horner (1986) 187 Ca1.App.3d 1380 which the court held that an unlincensed contractor cannot Treat Court: an independent contractor for purposes of workers' comp San Mateo Superior Court sation but he and his employees are employees as a mat Trial Judge: of law of the person hiring the work done. They cam Honorable James L. Browning maintain a civil action for damages at the workplace t Attorneys for Plaintiff/ must resort to the exclusive remedy of worke Respondent: compensation. John K. Van de Kamp In response to the motion for summary judgment, r Attorney General parties pointed out that at the time the complaint was fil- Steve Wbite the case of Blew v. Horner had not been decided. Tt Chief Assistant requested permission to amend the complaint to allege Attorney General cause of action pursuant to section 3706 of the Labor Coc Gloria DeHart This section provides that an injured employee may bring Supervising Deputy action at law against his employer if the "employer fails Attorney General secure the payment of compensation." Furthermore, sect Mar,A Roth 3708 provides that in such an action, negligence of Deputy Attorney General employer is presumed and usual defenses to a neglige! 0000 State Building action are not available. San Francisco, CA 94102 In reply, petitioner argued that even if real parties w permitted to amend their complaint, it was entitled Attorney for Defendants/ summary judgment because it had a workers' compensat Appellants: 4 O�' policy in full force and effect at the time Mr. Rapoza John J. Hartford, Esq. injured. A declaration to that effect was attached to S�1H James Avenuereply P.O. Box 1207 t, 3 3 0 7 Redwood City, CA 94064 S43 3 / At the hearing, real parties argued that to av application of section 3706, petitioner would have to sh actual payment of compensation and not merely insura) coverage. On March 31, 1987, an order was filed providing part: "The Court does not agree that the phrase ''secure i VOR ERS' COMPENSATION payment of compensation' is satisfied merely by maintenance of insurance in the abstract as opposed to Cite as 87 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4526 maintenance of insurance specifically covering plaintiff this action. Only the latter would satisfy the statute." I CAMPOS FOOD FAIR court, citing Blew v. Horner, went on the grant the motior: Petitioner, the extent that plaintiff was found to be an employee W n . 1 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL [C.C. P. Sections 1013a, 2015. 5] 2 3 I am a resident of the County of San Mateo and over the age 4 of eighteen years . I am not a party to the within action. My 5 business address is 51 James Avenue, Post Office Box 1207, 6 Redwood City, California 94064 . 7 On August 3 , 1987 I served the preceding 8 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES 9 10 11 12 13 on the parties in said action by placing a true 14 copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope, with postage thereon 15 fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Redwood City, i 16 California , addressed as follows : 17 Office of the County Clerk County of Contra Costa 18 40 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 19 Mr. L. Douglas Pipes 20 Office of the District Attorney County of Contra Costa i 21 40 Muir Road Martinez , CA 94553 22 Board of Supervisors 23 County of Contra Costa 40 Muir Road 24 Martin,jz , A qN 94.5MRTFORD, declare under penalty of perjury under 25 the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and 26 correct, and that this Proof was execut d on Au st 3, 1987 27 at Redwood City, California . 28 JOHN J RD _ _ L