Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06091987 - 1.9 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 June 9, 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 OUn4�gtkuneel CLAIMANT: JOAN GOTTESFELD DUTTON G 7 c/o Elliott Friedman c ATTORNEY: 1320 Solano Ave. , #202 GP 945953 Albany, CA 94706 Date received �a�tinez, ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON May 13 , 1987 CC BY MAIL POSTMARKED: May 0, 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: May 15 , 1987 gaIL BAATCtELOR, Clerk P y 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: Dated: s� ,, 2,?Z BY: C/ ` puty County Counsel Ill. 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. JUN 9 1987 Dated: 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 Jnited States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, .alifornia, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. )ated: JUN 1.0 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by Deputy Clerk ',C: County Counsel County Administrator GOVERNMENT CODE CLAIM MAY 1987 TO THE GOVERNING BODY OF: COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ` OUR CLIENT & CLAIMANT: JOAN GOTTESFELD DUTTON 25 Northgate Road Walnut Creek , CA 94598 DATE OF INJURY: 4/5/87 PLACE OF INJURY: sidewalk near 2817 Moselle Court DESCRIPTION OF INCIDENT: Ms . Dutton fell on negligently maintained sidewalk near 2817 Moselle Court . NATURE OF DAMAGES: Fracture of left ankle , bone chip between heel & foot , shoulder injury and muscle spasms of left foot and leg . Additionally, these injuries are aggravating her diabetic condition. AMOUNT OF CLAIM: $100 ,000 . 00 ATTORNEYS TO WHOM NOTICES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED: Elliott Friedman 1320 Solano Ave. , Ste. 202 Albany, CA 94706 DATED: May -/-, 1987 Elliott Friedman Attorney for Claimant PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL I am over the age of 18 and not a party to this cause. I am a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing occurred . My address is: 1320 Solano Ave. , Ste. 202 , Albany, CA 94706 I served the foregoing Government Code Claim by enclosing a true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to each person whose name and address is given below, and depositing the envelope in the United States mail with the postage fully prepaid on the date and place as shown below. Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 805 Las Juntas Martinez , CA 94553 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed on May -7 , 1987 , at Albany, CA. Ilal a Ad_C� C:IP4Q,t-s B�adaline FluhrFluhr ' 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 Jude 9 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to } The copy of this document mailed to you 7s yodr notice of California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors .(Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to %8r�M*�Gg,,nsel Amount: 200, 000 . 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all arnings". CLAIMANT: DECHANTEL HUGHES t11 151997 c/o Eric Weaver CA 94553 ATTORNEY: Siegel , Friedman & Yee Ma 'nQ ' 3270 East 14th Street Date received ADDRESS: Oakland, CA 94601 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON May 13 , 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: May 12, 1987 Certified P 118 757 720 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: May 15, 19$7 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: �c� j� BY: ��.C.�G L-r"t,c L-C'�Gc,l�--k�e��ity 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. 1 Dated: `SUN �v� 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. fou may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult in 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 )nited States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, ,alifornia, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to ;he claimant as shown above. sated: JUN 1.0 1981 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by Deputy Clerk Z: County Counsel County Administrator w CLAIM AGAINST ::;IVEDRECEIVED COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 87 CLAIMANT'S NAME: DECHANTEL HUGHES AMOUNT OF CLAIM: $200, 000.00 CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS: c/o ERIC WEAVER SIEGEL, FRIEDMAN & YEE 3270 East 14th Street Oakland, CA 94601 Telephone: (415) 536-2200 ADDRESS TO WHICH NOTICES ARE TO BE SENT: c/o ERIC WEAVER Same address as above. DATE OF INCIDENT: February 10, 1987 LOCATION OF INCIDENT: District Attorney's Office, Victim/Witness Assistance Program, 100 - 37th Street, Room 220, Richmond, CA. HOW DID THE INCIDENT OCCUR: On February 10, 1987, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordered that the Victim/Witness Assistance Program be transferred from the Office of the District Attorney to the Probation Department. Ms. Hughes was an employee of the Program and was transferred from the Office of the District Attorney to the Probation Department. At 4:40 p.m. on February 10, 1987, Deputy District Attorney Bob Law came to Ms. Hughes' office and said "I need to talk with you. " As she was on the phone at that time she did not immediately respond. Mr. Law pushed himself up against her chair so that she could not move and manually hung up her phone. When she inquired why he did this, Mr. Law replied "Mr. Yancey has instructed me to tell you to get out, that you are no longer an employee of the District Attorney's office. " Mr. Law also demanded Ms. Hughes' key/Id card in a very loud and threatening manner. Mr. Law yelled "Get out, " at least seven times, placing in her in great fear of imminent harm. Mr. Law refused to allow Ms. Hughes to leave her desk by physically blocking her exit from her desk with his body for approximately 15 minutes while shouting at her. At all times Ms. Hughes was in fear of her physical safety. On February 11, 1987, at 9:30 a.m. , Mr. Law was notified that Ms. Hughes would be coming to pick up her personal belongings. Mr. Law and Chief Investigator Harold Franklin instructed the clerks in the office, "If Dee Hughes comes in, contact us immediately. " Then they proceeded to lock all doors to prevent Ms. Hughes from entering the office. Mr. Law and Mr. Franklin met Ms. Hughes at the door. Mr. Franklin told Ms. Hughes "Dee, Mr. Yancey wants you to leave. " Mr. Law and Mr. Franklin then followed Ms. Hughes to her office and Mr. Franklin sat on the edge of Ms. Hughes' desk with his legs apart, with his hand in his pocket, coat pulled back, exposing his gun while Mr. Law stood blocking the door. -1- The conduct described above constituted false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and assault. Mr. Law and Mr. Franklin were acting within the course and scope of their employment and under the express instruction and direction of Mr. Gary Yancey, their supervisor. DESCRIBE INJURIES OR DAMAGE: Pain, suffering, fear, humiliation, emotional distress. NAME OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES CAUSING INJURY OR DAMAGE IF KNOWN: Office of the District Attorney of Contra Costa County, Mr. Gary Yancey, Mr. Robert Law and Mr. Harold Franklin. ITEMIZATION OF CLAIM: Uncertain at this time. Signed by or on behalf of claimant: Zt.��G &j&.& + Eric Weaver CERTIFICATION NUMBER: P 118 757 720 -2- PROOF OF SERVICE I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County of Alameda. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within entitled action; my business address is 3270 East 14th Street, Oakland, California 94601. On May 12, 1987 1 served the following 1. CLAIM AGAINST COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA. on the Defendants in said action, by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereof fully prepaid, in the United States post office mail at Oakland, California, addressed as follows: J.R. Olson County Clerk/Recorder Contra Costa County Courthouse P.O. Box 911 Martinez, CA 94553 I, Christopher Weills, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 12, 1987, at Oakland, California. Christopher Weills -3- 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 June 9 , 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 al1CW0uhi,4gs�Dunset CLAIMANT: SANDY MEYER `�� 250 Chilpancingo Parkway #3 MAY 151987 ATTORNEY: Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Date received Martinez, CA 94553 ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON May 11, 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: May 9, 1987 Certified P 561 944 669 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: May 15 , 1987 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: /�/Sr BY: �G �Z4-���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 ( V) 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. JUN 9 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. Dated: JUN 10 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR byZz/�,��_Ze_�eputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator RECEIVED MAY 111987 May 4, 1987 NAY 1987 Public Works Dept.6th Floor Oq .Contra Costa County , .Public Works . 651 Pine Street .Martinez, CA 94553 RE: Injury Accident This letter is to inform you and department that I wish to file an accident claim, for my injuries due to a very unsafe surface condition. " The accident, involving myself, occurred on Monday, February 9, 1987. The time.was approximately 4 pm, the weather was partly sunny with a few clouds. It had been raining three hours earlier, yet at this time the grounds were y dry. I had set out for a bike ride, since the weather was mostly clear. Upon leaving the exit driveway of the Willow Run apartment complex, and pro- ceeding onto the sidewalk, I suddenly slip on a metal water panel that covers 90% of the sidewalk (due to it collecting water from the rain) . I fell for- ward off to my left side. I landed on the cement, hitting my head (just above the temple) and left shoulder. I nearly was knocked unconscious from the blow to my head. I was helped up by someone shortly after the fall. At. this time I could barely move my left upper body and left arm. I proceeded to go to the County Hospital, due to the severe pain I was in. I found that.I had broken my left shoulder in two places, and suffered a concussion. I remained in a shoulder immobilizer for five to six weeks, with limited movement. The con- cussion took some time to subside. I also chipped my left molar from the fall. At the present, I still am having pain in my left shoulder and have somewhat limited movement in my left arm. I wish to have this claim investigated as soon as possible. Sincerely, Sandy Meyer Claimant i 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 June 9. 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 "Warnings County Counsel CLAIMANT: SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY Southern Pacific Building MAY 15 1987 ATTORNEY: One Market Plaza San Francisco, CA 94105 Date received �wtinez, CA 943' ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON '-'day 11 , 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: May 8 , 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: May 15, 1987 p IL BATCHELOR, Clerk B : 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: ,-v� 1-,7z) �— 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 (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. JUN 9 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. )ated: JUN 1.0 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by -.-Deputy Clerk :C: County Counsel County Administrator 4 CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST Contra Costa County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 RE: Paul Allen Henderson v. Southern PacificC Transportation Company, et al. I � Mqy � 111987 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to California Government Code § 900 et seq. , this claim is hereby presented as follows: 1. Name and Address of Claimants: Southern Pacific Transportation Company Southern Pacific Building One Market Plaza San Francisco, CA 94105 2. Address for Sending Notices: Jonathan M. Fil CORRIGAN AND FIL Southern Pacific Building One Market Plaza, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94105 3 . Date, Place and Circumstances of Occurrence: On or about July 11, 1986, Paul Henderson was driving his motorcycle on Park Road in Benicia and collided with a train. 4. Description of Loss of Indebtedness: Plaintiff has asserted a claim for personal injuries (please see attached Summons and Complaint, marked as Exhibit A) . 5 . Names of Public Employees Causing Loss: The names of any responsible public employees are not known at this time. 6. Amount Claimed as of Date of Presentation of This Claim: Exact amount of the damages is not know at this time. Southern Pacific Transportation Company 's claim is for contribution and/or contractual, equitable , and implied indemnity for any and all amounts which it is required tq. pay as a result of any settlement or judgment in said action. (1 Signed atz,� �u '��'- `�' , this 6. day of CORRIGAN AND FIL / -7- '�C, JONATHAN M. FIL 4torney for Defendant SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY THIS FORM IS FILED WITHIN 100 DAYS FROM DATE OF LOSS OR SERVICE OF THE COMPLAINT OR CROSS-COMPLAINT, IN COMPLIANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE § 911. 2 2 - SUMMONS t XITACION JUDICIAL) tat couwr ua arty NOTICE TO DEFENDANT. (Aviso a Acusado) 6010 tA"u+o Of 1A C°"r' SC}MERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY ; MAY 0 7 198 7 ROBERT E. WAI.+Cbr.IT; CITY OF BENICIA; DOES I through X 4-SAY CY YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: ���` - (A Ud. le estJ demandando) PAUL ALAN HE'NDERSON You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this sum. Despu6s de que le entmguen esta citaci6n judicial casted mons is served on you to file a typewritten re- tiene un plaro de 30 DIAS CALENDARIOS para presenter sponse at this court. una reespuesta eSCH4 a miliquina en esta corfe. A letter or phone call will not protect you; your Una carta o una Ramada te4ef6nica no le ofmmri typewritten response must be In proper legal p110tecci6n; su rrspuesta escrita a mrlquina tiene que form if you want the court to hear your case. cumplir con las formalidades lega/es apropiadas si usted If you do not file your response on time,you may quiere que la corfe escuche su case lose the case, and your wages, money and pro. Si usted no presenta su respuesta a tiermpgr puede perder perty may be taken without further warning from el cas% y le pueden quitar su safari%su dinero y otras cocas the court. de su proptedad sin aviso adicional par parte de la corse. There are other legal requirements. You may Exisfen otros requisitos legates. Puede que usted quiera went to call an attorney right away. If you do not Ilamar a un abogado inmediatantente. Si no cone a un know an attorney, you may call an attorney refer• abogad% puede llamar a un servicio de referencia de ral service or a legal aid office (listed in the phone abogados o a una oficina de ayuda legal(vm el directorio book). telef6nico). [ASL NUMBE : (Numem&1(~0 The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y direcci6n de la carte es) 96238 Superior Court of California 600 Union Avenue Hall of Justice Fairfield, CA 94533 The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiff's attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is: (El nombre, la ffirecci6n y el numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abagado, es) WILLIAM RUNYON, ESQ. LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM RUNYON 2151 Salvio Street, Suite #299 Concord, California 94520 Telephone (415) 825-3318 DATE: MAY - 11087 ::SP:�N',D:RA:D:. %Wffi:PPN1GHT I (Fecha) , ME1{. C��WFORD Clerk, by (,lctuarip) NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served 1. QQ as an individual defendant, ti; 2. Q as the person sued under the fictitious name of fspeclfyl: r HT1. 3. Q on behalf of (speclfyl: � '-t �•':' :mss%' under: CCP 416.10 (corporation) Q CCP 416.60 (minor) Q] CCP 416.20 {defunct corporation} [_Q CCP 416.70 (conservatee) Q� CCP 416.40 (association or partnership) Q CCP 416.90 (individual) other: •+- u0 4. Q by personal delivery on (date): Fe►n+Adoo+Rd by Rvb 982 is"rev*"* !'- •-.;tewl Judicial Co '.,forma ?'_, ' 18841 CCP 412.20 -12 . PROOF OF SERVICE — SUMMONS (Use separate proof of service for each person served) 1. 1 served the a. Q summons Q complaint Q amended summons Q emended complaint Q completed and blank Case Questionnaires Q Other (specify): b, on defendant (name): c. by serving 0 defendant Q other (name and title or relationship to person served): d. Q by delivery Q at home Q at business (1) date: (2) time: (3) address: ' a Q by mailing (1) date: (2) place: 2. Manner of service (check proper box): a. Q Persons! service. By personally delivering copies. (CCP 415.10) b. Q Substituted service on corporation, unincorporated association (including partnership), or public entity. By leaving, during usual office hours, copies in the office of the person served with the person who apparently was in charge and thereafter mailing (by first-class mail,postage prepaid)copies to the person served at the place where the copies were left. (CCP 415.20(a)) C. Q Substituted service on natural person, minor, conservatee, or candidate. By leaving copies at the dwelling house: usual place of abode, or usual place of business of the person served in the presence of a competent member of the household or a person apparently in charge of the office or place of business, at least 18 years of age, who was informed of the general nature of the papers, and thereafter mailing (by first-class mail, postage prepaid) copies to the person served at the place where the copies were left. (CCP 415.20(b)) (Attach separate declerstion ora/Bdev/t stating acts robed on to establish reasonable diligence In first attempting personal service.) d. Q Mail and acknowledgment service. By mailing (by first-class mail or airmail, postage prepaid) copies to the person served,together with two copies of the form of notice and acknowledgment and a return envelope,postage prepaid, addressed to the sender, (CCP 415.30) (Attach completed acknowledgment of rece/pt.) e Q Certified or registered mall service. By mailing to an address outside California (by first-class mail, postage prepaid. /- requiring a return receipt)copies to the person served. (CCP 415.40) (Attach signed retum receipt or other evidence of actual delivery to the person served.) f. Q Other (specify code section]: 0 additional page is attached. 3. The "Notice to the Person Served" (on the summons) was completed as follows (CCP 412.30, 415.10, and 474): a. Q as an individual defendant. b. Q as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify): c. Q on behalf of (specify): under: Q CCP 418.10 (corporation) Q CCP 416.60 Iminor) Q other: Q CCP 416.20 (defunct corporation) Q CCP 416.70 (conservatee) Q CCP 416.40 (association or partnership) Q CCP 416.90 (individual) d. Q by personal delivery on (date): . • 4. At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this action. 5. Fee for service: $ 6. Person serving: e. Q California sheriff, marshal, or constable. f. Name, address and telephone number and,if applicable, b. Registered California process server, county of registration and number: C. Employee or independent contractor of a registered California process server. d. Not a registered California process server. e. Exempt from registration under Bus. & Prof. Code 223501b). I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State /For Ce fomis shedff, marshal, or constable use only) 3f California that the foregoing is true and correct. I certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: \ Date: ""Rfl r NA Rfl . - ,.A�Www IwOw •' - "ENDORSED" FI LED MAY - 11987 1 WILLIAM RUNYON,ESQ. LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM RUNYON 14EIL CRAWFORD, County Clerk 2 2151 Salvio Street, Suite #299 $41DRA D. WRIGHT Concord, California 94520 BY DEPUTY CLERK 3 Telephone (415) 825-3318 4 Attorney for Plaintiff PAUL ALAN HENDERSON 5 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SOLANO 10 PAUL ALAN HErIDERSONNO. 96238 11 ) Plaintiff, ) FIRST AMENDED OOMpLAINr 12 vs. FOR DAMAGES ) 13 ) SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION ) 14 COMPANY; ROBERT E. WALCOTT; ) CITY OF BENICIA; DOES I ) 15 rough X, ) Defendants. ) . 16 17 18 Plaintiff alleges that: 19 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 20 For a First Cause of Action against Defendants SOCYTT N PACIFIC 21 TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, ROBERT E. WALCM, CITY OF BENICIA, CALIFORNIA, 22 Plaintiff alleges that: 23 1. The true names or. capacities, whether individual, corporate, 24 associate or other wise, of Defendants, DOES I through X, inclusive are 25 unknown to Plaintiff who therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious 26 names. Plaintiff is informed and believes and alleges thereon that each of 27 the Defendants designated here as DOE is responsible in some manner for the 28 events and happenings herein referred to, and thereby proximately caused 1 injury and damages to the Plaintiff, as herein stated. 2 2. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants and each of them, were 3 acting as agents,. employees, and servants of each other and.were acting within 4 the course and scope of that employment at the time of the events described 5 herein. 6 3. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant SOCTHERN PACIFIC 7 TRANSPORTATION COMPANY (hereinafter referred . to as "RAILROAD") was a Delaware 8 corporation, doing business in California under and by virtue of the laws of 9 the State of California. 10 4. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant ROBERT E. WAL00'IT 11 (hereinafter referred to as "WALCOTT") was the agent and employee of Defendant 12 RAILROAD and was acting within the course and scope of his agency and 13 employment at the time of the events described herein.' 14 5. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE CITY OF BENICIA 15 (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") was an incorporated city in the State of 16 California chartered and organized under the laws of the State of California.. 17 6. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant RAILROAD, Defendants and 18 each of them were, and are, the owners of a certain railroad train herein 19 mentioned. 20 7. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant WAIAO'IT, Defendants and 21 each of them, were driving and operating said train with the consent, 22 permission and knowledge of Defendants, and each of them. 23 8. Plaintiff is informed and believes and based upon such information 24 and belief alleges, that on or about July 11, 1986, Defendant CITY owned 25 and/or maintained or was responsible by law for maintaining property located 26 at the intersection of Park Road and the railroad crossing located 27 approximately 795 feet west of the intersection with Industrial Way. 28 -2- 1 9. on or about Jully 11,1986, Plaintiff, PAUL ALAN HENIDERSON 2 (hereinafter referred to as "HENDERSON") was operating his 1981 Yamaha 3 mtordycle in a westerly direction along Park Road in the .City of Benicia, 4 County of Solano, California. 5 10. At said time and place Defendant RAILROAD, Defendants and each of 6 them, were operating their train in a southerly direction across Park Road, 7 City of Benicia, County of Solano, California. ' 8 11. At said time and place Defendant RAILROAD, Defendants and each of 9 them, so negligently, carelessly and recklessly entrusted, managed, 10 maintained, drove . and operated their railroad trains so as to cause a 11 collision with HENDERSON'S motorcycle causing FENIDERSON to suffer the injuries 12 hereinafter alleged. 13 12. At a proximate result of the acts of Defendant RAILROAD, WALCOM, 14 CITY,. Defendants and each of them, Plaintiff was injured in his health, 15 strength, and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock to his nervous 16 system and person, all to Plaintiff's general damage in an amount as yet 17 unknown to Plaintiff, and Plaintiff prays leave to amend this complaint and 18 insert the same herein when ascertained. 19 13. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants and each 20 of them, Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that it will 21 be necessary for him to secure further medical treatment and care in the 22 future, and that Plaintiff has and will become liable to pay reasonable sums 23 for such medical treatment and care in an amount as yet unkown to Plaintiff 24 and Plaintiff prays leave to amend this Complaint to insert the same herein 25 when ascertained. 26 14. As a further direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants 27 and each of them, Plaintiff was unable to carry on his usual occupation and 28 -3- 1 has suffered a loss of wages, and Plaintiff believes - and.alleges thereon that 2 he will incur further loss of wages in the future as a proximate result of the 3 acts of Defendants. and each of them, for a total . wage loss which is presently 4 unknown to Plaintiff and Plaintiff prays leave to amend this cowplaint and 5 insert the same herein when ascertained. 6 15. As a proximate result of the acts of Defendants and each of them, 7 Plaintiff has been generally damaged in excess of the jurisdictional limit of 8 the Municipal Court. 9 SECOND CAUSE OF AC'T'ION 10 16. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1 through 9 of the First 11 Cause of Action. 12 17. On or about July 11, 1986, Plaintiff HENDERSON was operating his 13 1981 Yamaha motorcycle in the manner alleged in paragraph 9 above, when 14 Defendant CITY, Defendants and each of them, so negligently, carelessly, gnd 15 wrecklessly managed, maintained, cared for, supervised and controlled the 16 property and traffic signals adjacent and contiguous to the intersection of. 17 the railroad crossing and Park Road as to cause the collision of Plaintiff 18 HENDERSON'S motorcycle with Defendant RAILROAD'S train thereby causing 19 Plaintiff to suffer the injuries hereinafter alleged. The negligence of 20 Defendant CITY, Defendants and each of them is based on the following 21 factual circumstances existing at all times herein mentioned: the intersection 22 of the railroad crossing and Park Road constituted a dangerous conditions for 23 motorists traveling in a westerly direction on Park Road in that: an 24 embankment and foliage on the property prevented motorists from seeing 25 approaching trains until after committing to crossing the intersection; and in 26 that a stationary railroad 'crossing sign, erected and maintained by Defendant 27 CITY, Defendants and each of them, was obscured by foliage; and in that these 28 -4- 1 circumstances created a deceptive condition rendering the signals and warnings 2 of the moving train and the obscured crossing sign wholey inadequate. 3 18. As a proximate result of the acts of Defendant RAILROAD, TnAL0Mj 4 CITY, Defendants and each of them, Plaintiff was injured in his health, 5 strength and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock to his nervous 6 -system and person, ail to Plaintiff's general damage in an amount as yet 7 unknown to Plaintiff, and Plaintiff prays leave to amend this complaint and 8 insert the same herein when ascertained. 9 19. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants and each 10 of them, Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that it will 11 be necessary for him to secure medical treatment and care in the future, and 12 that Plaintiff has and will become liable to pay reasonable sums for such 13 medical treatment and care in an amount as yet unknown to Plaintiff and 14 Plaintiff prays leave to amend this complaint to insert the same herein when 15 ascertained. 16 20. As a further direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants 17 and each of them, Plaintiff was unable to carry on his usual occupation and 18 has suffered a loss of wages, and Plaintiff believes and alleges thereon that 19 she will incur further loss of wages in the future as a proximate result of the 20 acts of Defendants and each of them, for a total wage loss which is presently 21 unknown to Plaintiff, and Plaintiff prays leave to amend this complaint and 22 insert the same herein when ascertained. 23 21. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants and each 24 of them, Plaintiff has been generally damaged in excess of the jurisdictional 25 limit of the Municipal Court. 26 22. On or about October 29, 1986, Plaintiff filed a claim against 27 Defendant CITY OF BENICIA pursuant to Government Code Section 910, et seq.; on 28 -5- I November 19, 1986, Defendant CITY OF BENICIA rejected said claim in writing to 2 Plaintiff. 3 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff HENDERSON prays forjudgment .against Defendants 4 and each of them, as follows: 5 1. For general damages according to proof; 6 2. For special 8amages according to proof; 7 3. For cost of suit herein incurred; 8 4. For' such other• and further relief as that the Court may deem 9 proper. 10 Date: April 30, 1987 LAW OFFICES LLIAM RUNYON 11 12 zM , - 13 Attorney fo Plaintiff PAUL ALAN HENDERSON 14 15 16 VERIFICATION 17 I am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action; 18 I have read the, foregoing First Amended Complaint for Damages and know 19 ,the contents hereof; and I certify that the same is true'of my own knowledge, 20 except as to the matters which are therein stated upon my information and 21 belief, and as to those matters I believe to be true. 22 Executed this 30 day of 1987, at Concord, California. 23 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and 24 correct. 25 26 .G 27 PAUL ALAN HENDERSON 28 -6- 1 DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY MAIL 2 3 I , MICHAEL MILLER, say and declare: 4 I am a citizen of the United States, over eighteen years 5 of age, and not a party to the within action. My business G address is Southern Pacific Building, One Market Plaza, 7 Suite 200, San Francisco, California 94105 . 8 That on May 7 , 1987 I served the 9 attached: 10 CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 11 by placing a true copy (copies) thereof in an envelope(s) 12 addressed to: 13 County of Contra Costa Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 14 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez , CA 94553 15 16 and by then sealing and depositing said envelope(s) , with the 17 postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States Mail at San 18 Francisco, California. That there is delivery service by United 19 States Mail at the place so addressed and that there is regular 20 communication by United States Mail between the place of mailing 21 and the place so addressed. 22 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is 23 true and correct. 24 Executed on May 7 , 1987 , at San Francisco, 25 California. 26 /x� MIC AEL MILLE 27 28 r � CLAIM w BOARD OF S`JPERVT5 .gS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION tie Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT June 9, 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 Supervisorss�OUn e1 (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Governmubsv Amount: Unspecified Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnings"� 151g$7 to RY CLAIMANT: LISA J.3500 ClaytonRoad #B182 Martinez, CA 3455` ATTORNEY: Concord., CA 94519 Date received 1987 CAO ADDRESS: BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON May 13 , BY MAIL POSTMARKED: May 12, 1987 I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk / DATED: May 15, 1987 BY: Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (yt } This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. � ` 1 ( ) 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 910.6). ( ) 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: C4,,') yZ _ BY: CD 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 (h} 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 dateJ. Dated: JUN 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 1 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. Dated: ,JUN 10 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by ��-�'� Deputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator CLAIM TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Instructions to Claimant 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 present�ed 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 , CA 94553 (or mail to P.O. Box 911, Martinez, CA) 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 ) Reser g stamps RECEIVED MAY 13 1987 Against the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA) or DISTRICT) '(Fill in 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: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. • When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) VAy 19tp7 a;& 153G N am 2. Where did the damage or in occur? (Include city and county) dAt lkl#l;v sr���1' ,Av 1s1,*Arz Atx . CoAiw G'os 4 L,o' vvey ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details, use extra sheets if required) eqoiivNReAITY� riTABd7 ! CSAR wos dwnjAS oar•o-Aa. pri var, Pai✓c uj&y .Th6 ,ORi rV9 lir As doo l0'i,vj To i& leaf+ wh;ie TL4&A)jn9 943HT S hlew my hoaN hu+ he h14 nu. hcfcQe he- am&W STop. ------ - ------------------------------------------------------------- 4 . Wh-at-pa--rticular act or omission on the part of county or district officers , servants or employees caused the injury or damage? (over) r 2 5. What are the names of county or district officers, -.servants,=ars I employees causing the damage or injury? --------------------------------------------- ----------------------- 6. What damage or injuries do you claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage) my -rlxE '606R. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. Names and addresses of witnesses, doctors and hospitals. ---- ------------ITE----------------------------- -- = itu syou made on account of this accident or injury: M 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 . Claiman ' s Si nature " Add s 9'f�Srl9' Telephone, No. Telephone No. 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. " . TR��FF|CCOLL(S|(}�� .IREP(1RT—P,upmrxy DamageC]n{y ` orijinL^to "fficei;cop`,j°/ to Involved,�"v^ TO ITT .1, CODE 5 LICE SE STATE � PART L S' ft .No,. ADDRESS DAMAGED � / ' IMPORTANT ����� CAREFULLY . ' Keep this report This is your record of this accident. To comply with California Vehicle Code (VC) Section 20002 (duty where property damaged) you must either.- a. ithor�a Give the owner or person in charge of such prope�ty the name and address of the driver and owner nfthe vehide� or in the absence ofthe owner, ' b. Leave a written notice in a conspicuous place on *Lhe other vehicle or damaged property' giving the name and address of the driver and owner of the vehicle involved and a statement of the circumstances. This infornnation is necessary for the completion of your state SR-1 Form, Report of Traffic Accident, and your insurance report. VEHICLE CODE SECTION 18000 ' The driver of a vehicle involved in an accident r6su|t` g iM damage 10the property of any ONE party in excess of the amount stated in VC Section 15000 or in the ihjury or death of any person MUST submit a SR-1 Form to y the California Department ofMotor Vehicles within 15days� .. Note: Failure to comply may result in suspension ofyo�rdrivor's license. Form SR-1 may be obtained from the DopartMent of MQtor \/ehic|oo' the California Highway Patrol, any police station, motor vehicle club, or insurance agent. `If city or state property is damaged, you will becontac-Led regardingp sib|e liability. ` me21,4n I. FREE EST,MATES �� &- - BODY SMOP ESTIMATE OF REPAIRS 5 W. 10th Street—P.O.Box 579 IOCH, 509 L & O BODY SHOP AN 54-974 CA9C15) t4�5; 754-9749 or 14154 757-0211 AT VAL STROUGH CITY STATE ZIP DATE 1725 W 10th Street ���� A, ZCZa 4� Antioch, Ca, 94509 NSE NO. MILEAGE MOTOR NO. AND/OR SERIAL NO. (415) 757-0211 + 7 ARRY HOLLAND (415) 754=9°749 PHONE OSCAR BAUT15TA HOUR RATE 538.00 HOME �^ --"------- _ BUSINESS 0- FRONT PARTS b,.Ha. Sublet LEFT PARTS Lb,. Sublet RIGHT PARTS M, s„61m� B mgr F Mrd r F ndr Q; 1 u 'Pr4 / Smpr Srkt �.` A/; n/-t 0 1'-` ;� Fndr Shld Smpr Gd ndr Sh1d %F• -' Fndr Mldg Bmp Bolts s Shims jFndr &Aid6 ,-7 ,-1 c. Hdlmp Valence Grvl Shld - HdImp Door Prk Lite - Hdlmp Sealed Beam Fri Syst - Hdlmp Door CC-I -Post Franc Door IFrt) i Mbr Sealed seem Cowl •Post Door Hinge JV*hsal 1 ��+,r_� 7 Door (Frtl ,b Hub Cap /' f)f' t l ^ Door Mldg Door Hinge Hub& Drum Door Lock Door MId9 Knuckle Ctr Post Door lock Up Cont Arm 1 Door (Rear( Ctr Post Lr Cont Arm / / Door Mldo Do«{RserJ nock ( Rocker Pnl Door Mlog Rockr Mldg Tie Rod Ends Floor Rocker Pnl Otr. Pnl .Grille Rockr Mldg Floor Ott.Pnl Otr Mldo Otr M169 Qtr Ext Ott Ext Lock Plats Lr Whl Hag Whl Hag Lock Plate Up MISC. REAR Fri Seat Hood Bmpr Rear Sent Hood Hinge Bmpr Br kt Wndshld Hood Midg smpr Gd Wndshld Kit Hdeng Rad.Sup Beek Up Lite Top Rad. Core Lwr Body Pnl Tire %Worn Coolant Belt Rad Homes L Clamps Tail lite Antenna Fan Shroud Pe int 6 MtI fan Blade Trnk Lid/Gate AUTHORIZATION FOR REPAIRS Water Pump Trnk Lid Hinge You are hereby outhorired to maks the above repairs. A/C Core. Trnk Lid Mldg Signed Rochrg A/C Floor GROSS PARTS Q Frame +Mbr G' Mir Mts Gas Tnk TOW Tailpipe -Mtt it Trans Linkage Axis - NET PARTS Spring PAINT MATERIAL Hub 8 Drum 416.00 per hour Wfiss1 SALES TAX Valanc. c TOTAL LABOR-tjEAJ I — / G.O 7 02 G (Z C CODE:A -Align—Ex i X -Exchange —N -No- —ON •OVarheul—P-Paint GRAND TOTAL 3 iX R-Repair — S _Straighten— U -Used All Materials Are Subject To Price Change At Tirne Of Irwo'iea. ^^~ � 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 CLAIMANTJune 9 ^ 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Governmeng, jode Amount: Unspecified Section 913 and 015,4. Please nq1p-u�&� ��ox�,,,, _ C—LAlM'AMT: GEORGE EDWARD RIClQlD8ON %suO Y� � c/o Frank Frlaob ,.�` ��� ATTORNEY: 2907 S;sT`/io ��*w�— Concord, CA 94518 Date received ADDRESS: BY BY DELlVERY TO CLERK ON May 13 1987 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: May T2 ^ 1987 1. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is u copy of the above-noted claim. DATED: 15 I987 BHlL BATCYELOR, Clerk L. BaII ll. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors This claim complies substantially with Sections 0I0 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 lS days (Section 910.8)' ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warming of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3), ( ) Other: Dated: 8YJ4_-���_Yputy County Counsel 111. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 011'3)' IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present A�) 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, � � ��w/v Dated: wM0 �0� w w� IL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By Deputy Clerk WARNING (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (B) months from the dat' this notice was personally served or Jpposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945,6. (ou may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult in attorney, you should do so immediately. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING � declare under penalty of perjury that l am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the ]nited States, over age 18; and that today l deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, :alifnrnia, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to tp claimant as shown above. kN A �ted BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by Deputy Clerk :C: County Counsel County Administrator } CLAIM. TU:- , HOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF A C CONTR . �3-18rAWYapplicatian t0: Instructions to ClaimantC!erk of the Board Martinez,California 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 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 B"ilding, 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, 72rat end o his form. RE: Claim by )ReservpA fnr r��t .- .! stamps ELOF Against the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA) MAYj, 1987 ) or p� ja %�pq.-,,p DISTRICT) (Fill in name) ) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the Countyof Contra Costa or the above-named District in the sum of $ /UlYra.�'ml,,/rA' ) and in support of this claim represents as follows: _ .--when-did-the damage-or-injury occur? (Give exact-date and hours---- -Z7- /-1,4/°f '/tl rpgr- Oft/ /?1oxt"'v .2 ,/J-y7 �.- Where did-the :damage or a,n�ury occur? (Include city and-county) T "A-, i;V 11•-11je,&IIS iry 1 pA�7' ds'o rX �w/r1r/� d�� —r—r----=—..—�.—r---re—+r-----..--- ..----.,. -----r--..�.r--- 3. How did the damage or injury occur? ;Give full detaiSs, use extra sheets if required) A000/ .!?ter'Al SJ�'C7/.�a . in j,��f...�'� . C7S ..� .rh� = -G 6LJ 4.- what-particular-act-or omission on-the-part of-county-or district M officers, servants or employees caused the injury or damage? ,41Z i11<:i'' �4�IJ,� td/Z''4�,�/� !z '�`� 11►`1� t,=� I�, �'i^� /c1 Y-���;`_: (over) 5. Whit a-e the names of county or district officers, servants or employees causing the damage or injury? 6.'-'What damage or injuries do you claim resulted? (Give., full ext;U7- of injuries or . damages cla�i . Attach two estimates for .auto X4 j �damage) �ACL /s /, ,P� .t/✓ ?. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimate_-- amount of any prospective injury or damage. ) _ 4 fJ✓/%y j 4111 r of witnesses, do ____ct_______and_hosp_________itals_._____________ 8. Names and addresses ors 9. Li a you made an account of this accident or injury: t ;r"11 ITEM AMOUNT •-:ter ,•ST, � :T:w /,�l� I��� ,V.� i'i1rN •; 7S` 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 � ' ' • `1 `i"I1J.seN .'W/ 9v -? ,, ov e v o d e s s Telephone No. (Y09- 7 -5:Z6; Telephone No. 70 7 '-' A" / 71) NOTICE SectiLn 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 br 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 ferny. " �� ~ ^ ^� ^ - 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 izoz� 9 , 1987 and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of California Government ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code Amount: $I3,800,000' 00 Section 913 and 915^4, Please note 11 "Warn�g8,"���� ' (���unTy ��ow , CLAIMANT: DOUGLAS BREEZE c/o Law offices of /IFAy 15 1987 ATTORNEY: Richard N. l3ioalTo Street f�}�� -��y�iD��^ ���� ����� gU� ��o��p�m��/ r�e . Date received -- ~ '~~� -- - y��� II �g�7 ADDRESS: San Francisco, CA 9Z�133 BY DELIVERY 78 CLERK O ' ' BY MAIL POSTMARKED: 7 1987 1. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. y / May 15, 1987 EYIL BATCYELOR, Clerk DATED: epu y 'V1 Hall II. FROM: County Co n I TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Thi!Kclaim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910. This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 Z:91�0.2.,7ad 'we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). 0() Claim is not4�imely fiWd �The Clerk stVul4 return claim on ground thaUt was filed late and se warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 811.3). ( ) Other: Dated: BY ty County Counsel 111. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) (A Claim4was 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. ( x) Other: Portion f original claim 'amended not previouslyd as untimely is reiedted in full. ] certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. K�� � ���� Dated: —�`^ ~ «��« PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, 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 wont 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 u 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 u certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: JUN 1 0 1987 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR b ��=�) eputy Clerk | RECEIVED MAYA 1987 AMENDED CLAIM FOR DAMAGES ci YAT AGAINST THE CONTRA COSTA L2 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 7-A; THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA; AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DOUGLAS BREEZE hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa (hereinafter "County") , the Contra Costa County Sanitation District 7-A (hereinafter "District") , and the State of California for the sum of $13 ,800,000. 00 (Thirteen Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand Dollars) , and makes the following statements in support of the claim: 1. Claimant's post office address is 739 Home Street, Rialto, CA 92376. 2. Notices concerning the Claim should be sent to the Law Offices of Richard N. Dinallo, 909 Montgomery Street, Suite 106, San Francisco, CA 94133. 3 . The date and place of the occurrences giving rise to this claim is February 4, 1987, City of Antioch, Contra Costa County, California. 4. The circumstances giving rise to this claim are as follows: Douglas Breeze, claimant, was employed with the District as a maintenance superintendant. On or about February 4, 1987, Claimant was wrongfully terminated from his employment with the District. Up to and including that date, to wit: February 4, 1987, RONALD TSUGITA, District Manager, subjected Claimant to persecution, discrimination, harassment, and/or invaded Claimant's right of privacy by stating that Claimant must discontinue a relationship with a co-employee, based on an alleged conflict of interest. Further, said harassment and persecution often took place in the presence of other employees. On or about August 24, 1986, Claimant informed the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the District, JOEL KELLER, of TSUGITA's intentional and outrageous conduct as hereinbefore mentioned. KELLER, on behalf of the Board of Directors, told Claimant that the Board would soon take action on Claimant's behalf. Claimant learned on February 4, 1987, that, as of that date, the Board of Directors of the District, consisting of KELLER, NANCY PARENT, TOM TORLAKSON and SILVANO MARCHESI had taken no action on Claimant's behalf whatsoever. On or about February 4, 1987, as a result of TSUGITA's i harassment, discrimination, persecution and other interference with claimant's job functions, claimant suffered an emotional breakdown and was instructed by his physician that he should not work at the District as long as TSUGITA imposed such hostile and outrageous working conditions. RONALD TSUGITA's conduct resulted in claimant's constructive discharge, and constitutes a breach of the Implied Covenants of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and other violation 7- including, but not necessarily limited to Invasion of Privacy; Infliction of Emotional Distress; Defamation; as well as a breach and -2-i interference with claimant's employment agreement with the DISTRICT. 5i � Claimant's injuries include, but are not necessarily limited to: lost wages and benefits, emotional distress, medical and other special costs, general and punitive damages, and attorneys' fees incurred in his claim. 6. The names of the public employees causing the claimant's injuries include RONALD TSUGITA, JOEL KELLER, NANCY PARENT, TOM TORLAKSON, SILVANO MARCHESI. 7 . Claimant's claim as of the date of this claim is $13, 800, 000. 00 (Thirteen Million Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars) . 8. The basis of computation of the above amount is as follows: Loss of Wages: $500, 000 or according to proof Lost Employment Benefits $200, 000 or according to proof Medical and Special Expenses $100,000 or according to proof General Damages: $1,000,000 or according to proof Punitive Damages: $12,000, 000 or according to proof TOTAL: $13,800, 000.00 Dated: May 7, 1987 LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD N. DINALLO By KENNETH D. SCHNUR Attorney for Plaintiff DOUGLAS BREEZE 24041 -3- 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I, ANGELA PETERSON, declare that I am employed in 3 the-City and County of San Francisco, California. I am over the 4 age of eighteen years and am not a party to the within cause. 5 My business address is 909 Montgomery Street, Suite 106, 6 San Francisco, California 94133. 7 On May 21 1987, I served the within: AMENDED 8 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES on the party(s) in said cause, by placing a4 9 true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage 10 thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at San 11 Francisco, California, addressed as follows: 12 Clerk, Board of Su•1pervisors Contra Costa County 13 651 Pine St. Martinez, CA 94553 14 Attorney General, State of California 15 350 McAllister St. San Francisco, CA 94102 16 Contra Costa Sanitation District 7-A 17 2500 Pittsburgh-Antioch Highway Antioch, CA 94509 18 Board of Control 19 926 J St. , Suite 300 Sacramento, CA 95814 20 I declare under penalty of perjury that the 21 foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was 22 executed on May 1987, at San Fra isco, Cal fornia. 23 24 ANG91A PETERSON 25 2095A 26 27 28 APPLICATION TO FILE LATE CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA BOARD ACTION Application to File Late Claim ) NOTICE TO APPLICANT June 9 , 1987 Against the County, Routing ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your Endorsements, and Board Action.) notice of the action taken on your application by (All Section References are to the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph III, below), California Government Code.) ) given pursuant to Government Code Sections 911.8 and 915.4. Please note the "WARNING" below. Claimant: DAVID MENCONI C0uniy COunse c/o Daniel ' Dell ' Osso, Esq. Attorney: Walkup, Shelby, Bastian, Melodia, Kelly & O'Reilly 1f "AY 15 1987 650 California Street, 30th Floor Martinez CA 94,553 Address: San Francisco, CA 94108 Amount: $200, 000. 00 By delivery to Clerk on May 15 , 1987 hand del . Date Received: May 15 , 1987 By mail, postmarked on no envelope I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors T0: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above noted Application to File Late Claim. DATED: May 15 , 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By _� Deputy L. Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) The Board should grant this Application to File Late Claim (Section 911.6). (x) The Board should deny this Application to File Late Claim (Section 911.6). DATED: / s VICTOR WESTMAN, County Counsel, By III. BOARD ORDER By unanimous vote of Supervisors present (Check one only) ( ) This Application is granted (Section 911.6). ( �() This Application to File Late Claim is denied (Section 911.6). I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. DATE: JUN 9 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By Deputy WARNING (Gov. Code 5911.8) If you wish to file a court action on this matter, you must first petition the appropriate court for an order relieving you from the provisions of Government Code Section 945.4 (claims presentation requirement). See Government Code Section 946.6. Such petition must be filed With the court within six (6) months from the date your application for leave to present a late claim was denied. You may seek the advise of any attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, u should do so immediately. IV. FROM: Clerk of the Board T0: 1 County Counsel 2 County A 'nis rator Attached are copies of the above Application. We notifed the applicant of the Board's action on this Application by mailing a copy of this document, and a memo thereof. has ben filed and endorsed on the Board's copy of this Claim in accordance with Section 29703. DATED: JUN 10 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR Clerk Deputy � , jY � Y V. FROM: 1 County Counsel 2 County Administrator TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Received copies of this Application and Board Order. DATED: County Counsel, By County Administrator, By APPLICATION TO FILE LATE CLAIM LAW OFFICES OF 1 WALKUP, SHELBY, BASTIAN. MELODIA RECEIVED KELLY $ O'REILLY 2 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION �%MAY15ESO CALIFORNIA STREET 1987 3 SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 84108 TELEPHONE (41E) 9E1'7210 4 5 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 6 7 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 10 11 IN RE: THE APPLICATION OF NO. DAVID MENCONI FOR LEAVE TO 12 PRESENT A LATE CLAIM APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PRESENT A LATE CLAIM 13 14 / 15 TO: EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITIES DISTRICT AND THE COUNTY 16 OF CONTRA COSTA: 17 1. Pursuant to the pertinent provisions of the California 18 Government Code, §911. 4 and §911. 6 , application is hereby made 19 by and on behalf of DAVID MENCONI for leave to present a late 20 claim against you and each of you. This Claim is founded upon 21 a cause of action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered 22 by DAVID MENCONI on May 15, 1986 , following an accident on the 23 sidewalk bordering Rochelle Road in Walnut Creek, California. The 24 further circumstances of the cause of action are set forth in 25 the proposed Claim which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and 26 incorporated by reference herein. 1 2 . This application is based on the grounds that the 2 legal right to present a Claim was not discovered by claimant 3 within the requisite 100 days nor could it have been discovered 4 by him in the exercise of reasonable diligence until on or after 5 the expiration of the 100 day period, and further, on the grounds 6 of mistake, inadvertence, surprise and inexcusable neglect in 7 the failure of claimants to file under California Government Code 8 §911. 2 . Finally, this application is based on the ground that 9 no prejudice has or will result to the County of Contra Costa 10 and the East Bay Municipal Utilities District by granting of a 11 late claim, all of which is set forth more specifically in the 12 Declaration of Daniel Dell 'Osso attached hereto and incorporated 13 herein by reference. 14 WHEREFORE, claimant requests that leave be granted to 15 present a late claim against you, and each of you, and that you 16 receive and act upon the proposed Claim attached hereto in 17 accordance with the appropriate provisions of the California 18 Government Code. 19 DATED: s�//!.�/�7 WALKUP, SHELBY, BASTIAN, MELODIA, `/ [ I KELLY & O'REILLY 20 21 BY:—ka-� DANIEL DELL'OSSO 22 Attorneys for Claimant 23 24 25 26 LAW C►FI"s or MR SHELBY.BASTIAN. .ODIA.KELLY a O'REILLY ROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1ARTFORD BLDG.•30TH FLOOR 650 CALIFORNIA STREET N FRANCISCO.CA 94108 (415) 981.7210 -2- WALKUP, SHELBY, BASTIAN, MELODIA, KELLY & O'REILLY 650 California Street, 30th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Attorneys for Claimant PROPOSED CLAIM FOR DAMAGES AGAINST THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ON BEHALF OF DAVID MENCONI TO: COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA David Menconi herewith presents his Claim for Damages against the County of Contra Costa in a sum of $200 , 000 . 00 . The particulars of the Claim are as follows : A. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CLAIMANT David Menconi c/o Walkup, Shelby, Bastian, Melodia, Kelly & O'Reilly 650 California St. , 30th Fl. San Francisco, Ca 94108 B. ADDRESS TO WHICH NOTICES ARE TO BE SENT DANIEL DELL'OSSO, ESQ. WALKUP, SHELBY, BASTIAN, MELODIA, KELLY & O'REILLY 650 California Street, 30th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 ( 415 ) 981-7210 C. DATE, PLACE AND OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH GIVE RISE TO THIS CLAIM 1. The accident giving rise to this Claim occurred on May 15, 1986 at approximately 4 :45 a.m. on the sidewalk bordering Rochelle Road in Walnut Creek, California, and the details of the occurrence are set forth below. 2 . At all times herein mentioned, Rochelle Road in Walnut Creek, California was being designed, planned, maintained and operated by the County of Contra Costa which was, at the time of this incident, involved in a construction project on said public roads and sidewalks. 3 . The County of Contra Costa negligently and carelessly planned, designed, constructed, operated, maintained, controlled and performed construction on said road such that said road and its bordering sidewalks were in a dangerous, defective and deceptive condition in that, among other factors, the sidewalk near 1127 Rochelle Road had been excavated. Said excavation was neither marked nor lighted and therefore was not clearly visible to pedestrians proceeding along said sidewalk. No signs were posted or barriers constructed warning of the excavation in the sidewalk and no covering of any type was placed across the excavation. 4 . As a direct and proximate result of said negligence and carelessness , and of the dangerous, defective and deceptive condition of said roadway and sidewalk, pedestrians on said sidewalk were reasonably likely to trip or fall into said open, uncovered and unlighted excavation, and there was a reasonably foreseeable risk that pedestrians on said sidewalk would sustain serious bodily injury or death as a proximate result of said negligence and carelessness and of said condition of said sidewalk. 5 . Said dangerous, defective and deceptive condition of said sidewalk was created by the negligent and careless conduct of employees and agents of the County of Contra Costa while acting within the course and scope of their employment and agency and the County of Contra Costa had actual and/or constructive knowledge of said dangerous, defective and deceptive condition. 6 . As a direct and proximate result of said negligence and carelessness', and of said condition and of the joint and several and concurrent negligence and carelessness of other, on or about May 15, 1986 claimant was a pedestrian proceeding along the sidewalk near 1127 Rochelle Road. While proceeding on said sidewalk, the plaintiff was unable to see the open, unmarked, unlighted excavation and was caused to and did fall into said excavation thereby injuring himself as hereinafter described. D. DAMAGES As a direct ' and proximate result of said negligence and carelessness of said condition of said sidewalk and said accident, claimant sustained serious and permanent injuries to his left arm and elbow. As a direct and proximate result of said matters and said accident and injuries, claimant has been compelled to and did make and incur expenses for medical care and treatment and has been unable at times since the accident to follow his regular employment, all to his special damages . E. EMPLOYEES CAUSING INJURY AND DAMAGES The names of the employees of said public entities responsible for the occurrence and injuries to David Menconi herein described are unknown to the claimant at this time. F. AMOUNTS CLAIMED Claimant claims general damages in the sum of $200 , 000 . 00 . Claimant claims special damages for medical care, treatment and loss of earnings and earning capacity in an amount presently unknown. DATED: /��//g WALKUP, SHELBY, BASTIAN, MELODIA, r KELLY & O'REILLY BY: a,,CAZ DANIEL DEL 'OSSO Attorneys for Claimant LAW OFFICES OF 1 WALKUP, SHELBY. BASTIAN, MELODIA KELLY & O'REILLY 2 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 850 CALIFORNIA STREET 3 SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 84108 TELEPHONE (415) 981-7210 4 S ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 6 7 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 10 IN RE THE LATE CLAIM APPLICATION No. OF DAVID MENCONI 11 DECLARATION OF DANIEL DELL'OSSO IN SUPPORT OF 12 APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A LATE CLAIM 13 / 14 15 I, Daniel Dell 'Osso, declare and affirm as follows : 16 I am an attorney at law licensed to practice before all 17 the Courts of the State of California, and I am a member of the 18 law firm of Walkup, Shelby, Bastian, Melodia, Kelly & O'Reilly, 19 attorney for claimants herein. 20 The claimant, David Menconi, was injured on May 15, 1986 21 when he tripped and fell into an open excavation in the sidewalk 22 bordering Rochelle Road in Walnut Creek, California. 23 Subsequent to this accident, on or about May 6, 1987 , 24 after the running of the 100 day period, I was contacted by Mr. 25 Menconi regarding his accident. I immediately interviewed the 26 claimant and set up an appointment for him to meet with me in I my office May 8 , 1987 . I asked him to bring with him all the 2 information regarding the accident as well as photographs of the 3 scene. Mr. Menconi was unable to keep his appointment on May 4 8 , 1987 and did not meet with me until the afternoon of %May 11, 5 1987 . Following the interview, and based upon the information 6 he provided during the interview, I contacted Pacific Gas and 7 Electric Company and Mountain Cascade, Inc. , both of whom had 8 been commissioned to do work on Rochelle Road and its bordering 9 sidewalks . It was not until I contacted representatives for these 10 companies on May 11, 1987 that I learned of the existence of a 11 possible claim against the East Bay Municipal Utilities District. t2 Prior to my phone calls of May 11, 1987 , the claimant 13 was not aware of the existence of any possible claim against the 14 East Bay Municipal Utilities District and/or the County of Contra 15 Costa. It was during these phone conversations that I learned 16 that the East Bay Municipal Utilities District had in fact 17 commissioned the project which involved the excavation in the 18 sidewalk where Mr. Menconi fell. 19 Following the above telephone conversations, investigation 20 and further research, I determined that the condition of the 21 sidewalk on Rochelle Road as well as the absence of signs and/or 22 covers warning of the excavation constituted a violation of 23 applicable law as well as a dangerous condition of public property. 24 This determination was first made on May 12 , 1987 . In light of 25 the 'foregoing facts , I immediately prepared the within application 26 for leave to file a late claim against the East Bay Municipal LAW OFFICES or ,LKUP,SHELBY.BASTIAN. LODIA.KELLY R WREILLY IROFESSIONAL CORPORATION HARTFORD BLDG•30TH FLOOR 650 CALIFORNIA STREET \N FRANCISCO, CA 94108 -2- (415) 2_(415) 981.7210 I District and the County of Contra Costa. 2 Up until Mr. Menconi contacted this office, he had been 3 dealing with representatives of Mountain Cascade, Inc. and the 4 Pacific Gas and Electric Company. During all his dealings with 5 those representatives, over approximately eleven months , he was 6 never informed nor could he have suspected the involvement of 7 the East Bay Municipal Utilities District and the County of Contra 8 Costa. During the entire period he lived on Rochelle Road and 9 observed the construction he never saw any East Bay Municipal 10 Utilities District vehicles at the job site. He saw vehicles 11 bearing the Mountain Cascade, Inc. logo. 12 Up until claimant contacted the declarant, he had been 13 diligent in investigating his case and in contacting the involved 14 parties . Neither Mountain Cascade nor Pacific Gas and Electric 15 Company indicated any involvement by a governmental entity and 16 it was therefore impossible for him to anticipate their involvement. 17 Under the circumstances, claimant ' s claim is being 18 presented within a reasonable time as said claim is being presented 19 within one year of the accident. Additionally, I . am informed 20 and believe that no prejudice will result to the East Bay Muncipal 21 Utilities District or the County of Contra Costa by the presentation 22 of said Claim. 23 In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted 24 that failure of the claimant to file this Claim within 100 days 25 was the result of mistake, inadvertence and excusable neglect 26 and further that the attached application should be granted and LAW OFFICES OF kLKUP,SHELBY,BASTIAN, 7LODIA.KELLY 3 WREILLY PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION HARTFORD BLOG-30TH FLOOR 650 CALIFORNIA STREET N FRANCISCO.CA 94108 14151 981-7210 -3- I the proposed claim appended hereto acted upon. 2 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing 3 is true and correct. Executed this 14th day of May, 1987 at San 4 Francisco, California. 5 DATED: WALKUP, SHELBY, BASTIAN, MELCIDIA, KELLY & O'REILLY 6 7 BY: 0 v -DANIEL DELLIOSSO 8 Attorneys for Plaintiff 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 LAWO"'FICKS of ALVUP,SHE1.9Y,BASTIAN. ELODIA.KELLY&OTEILLY PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION E HARTFORD SLOG-20TH FLOOR GSO CALIFORNIA STREET IN FRANCISCO,CA 94108 (415)981-7210 -4- APPLICATION TO FILE LATE CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COMM, CALIFORNIA BOARD ACTION Application to File Late Claim ) NOTICE TO APPLICANT June 9 , 1987 Against the County, Routing ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your Endorsements, and Board Action.) notice of the action taken on your application by (All Section References are to ) the Board of Supervisors (Paragraph III, below), California Government Code.) ) given pursuant to Government Code Sections 911.8 and 915.4. Please note the "WARNING" below. Claimant: SUSAN JANE COPPA County Counsel c/o Stewart & Stewart & Breslow Attorney: Thomas N. Stewart, III MAY 15 1987 1225 Alpine Road, #200 Address: Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Martinez, CA 94553 Amount: Unspecified By delivery to Clerk on May 11, 1987 hand del . Date Received: May 11,, 1987 By mail, postmarked on no envelope I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above noted Application to le to Claim. DATED: May 15, 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By Deputy L.Hall II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( ) The Board should grant this Application to File Late Claim (Section 911.6). The Board should deny this Application to File Late Claim (Section 911.6). DATED: CZ /98VICTOR WESTMAN, County Counsel, III. BOARD ORDER By unanimous vote of Supervisors present (Check one only) ( ) This Application is granted (Section 911.6). (X) This Application to File Late Claim is denied (Section 911.6). I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. DATE: JUN 9 1987 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By Deputy WARNING (Gov. Code 3911.8) If you wish to file a court action on this matter, you must first petition the appropriate court for an order relieving you Pram the provisions of Government Code Section 945.4 (claims presentation requirement). See Government Code Section 946.6. Such petition must be filed with the court within six (6) months from the date your application for leave to present a late claim Was denied. You may seek the advise of any attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, u should do .so immediately. IV. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: 1 County Counsel 2 County A iris ra or Attached are copies of the above Application. We notifed the applicant of the Board's action on this Application by mailing a copy of this document, and a memo thereof, has ben filed and endorsed on the Board's copy of this Claim in accordance with Section 29703. DATED: JUN 1 01981 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By Deputy V. FROM: 1 County Counsel 2 County Administrator TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Received copies of this Application and Board Order. DATED: County Counsel, By County Administrator, By APPLICATION TO FILE LATE CLAIM 1 MICHAEL TUCEVICH, Esq. 2400 Sycamore Drive , Suite 40 2 Antioch , CA 94509 Telephone : (414)439-8381 3 Attorney for Claimant 4 CLAIM AGAINST THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 5 6 TO: Clerk , Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 7 County Administration Bldg Martinez , CA 94553 8 CLAIMANT' S NAME: Susan Coppa Arc, 9 CLAIMANT' S ADDRESS : 857 Litwin Drivei?'l�,p� 10 Concord!,?_¢A 9418 AMOUNT 1OF CLAIM: $50 ,000 p�r� 11 ADDRESS TO NOTICES ARE 12 TO BE SENT: MICHAEL TUCEVICH Attorney at Law 13 2400 Sycamore Drive , Suite 40 Antioch , CA 94509 14 DATE OF OCCURANCE: July 17 through the present 15 16 PLACE OF OCCURANCE : Concord , California 17 MANNER IN WHICH CLAIM AROSE: 18 Claimant was present at a home birth of a Concord couple. The 19 mother , Rosetta Jackson, had previously gone to Kaiser Hospital for 20 a prenatal examination and informed her -Kaiser physican that she 21 was to have a home birth (this being her third child and the previous 22 two having been deliver-.ed` at home) . Mrs . Jackson experienced a 23 difficult del.ivery, the baby being eleven pounds and the shoulders 24 unable to clear the birth canal . In the midst of an emergency 25 situation, claimant was able to extricate the baby. The baby 26 emerged. not breathing, claimant called for immediate medical 27 assistance and proceeded to revive the baby via CPR to the extent 28 the baby was breathing normally upon the arrival of the paramedics . -1- L 1 1 The parents declined to have the baby transported to a hospital , 2 signed a medical release to that effect , and the paramedics left 3 labeling the non-transport aPdry run`.` 4 Three days thereafter the baby was taken to Kaiser Hospital , 5 and three weeks thereafter the baby died in Kaiser ' s care. Kaiser 6 doctors misdiagnosed the cause of death as due to brain damage 7 resulting from oxygen deprivation at birth . They declined to sign 8 the death certificate and notified police authorities that the mid ifl 9 in attendance was responsible for the baby' s death . 10 The coroner ' s office, in an effort to determine the cause of 11 death to the infant , sought the expertise of a neuropathologist 12 who determined the cause of death to be NOT related to the birth 13 or to any action whatsoever on the part of claimant . Specifically, 14 the neuropathologist , Dr . Janice Borcich , attributed the cause of 15 death to congenital birth defects to wit : Leigh ' s disease , Kidney 16 failure , and liver disease . The expert further concluded the baby ou' . 17 have died no matter where the delivery took place and found absolu ell 18 no fault with claimant ' s actions . She so advised the respective 19 police authorities and the District Attorney' s office of her findings , 20 dated May 14, 1986 . 21 Despite conclusive medical evidence to the contrary, the district 22 attorney' s office filed criminal charges against the claimant 23 alleging her to be responsible for the death of the baby. On July 24 14 , 1.986 the SF Chronicle qoute ' s Deputy DA Robert Law as follows , 25 "I think we 've got a woman who caused the death of a child , in part 26 by incompentence and in part by covering her own tracks ." This 27 statement was false when made and known to be false by the DA' s 28 office. -2- 1 Officials from the DA' s office continued to press claimant for 2 a plea of guilty to the allegation alluding to the baby' s death. 3 —Said charge has since been dismissed against the claimant. 4 following an evidentiary hearing at which claimant was obligated tc 5 prove her innocence . -Up until that hearing the DA' s office consistent 6 maintained that claimant was responsible for the baby' s death and 7 so represented to the various courts and news media. At the bearin 8 the Judge , Walter Rodgers , inquired from the bench of the DA wbeter 9 any evidence existed to support the allegation against claimant. Tb 10 Deputy DA, Jose Marin, replied , "the matter is still under investig t- 11 ion. " It was not until the following court appearance that the DA' s 12 office reversed themselves and proclaimed for the first time that 13 the death allegation was a "clerical error . " That pronouncement was 14 also false and known to be false inasmuch as the claimant through b r 15 previous attorney had attempted to enter a plea of guilty to a less r 16 charge of practicing midwifery without a license. Claimant ' s offer 17 was spurned and the DA' s office sought a jail sentence for the 18 claimant . 19 As a direct and proximate result of the DA' s office ' s false 20 statements and malicious prosecution of this matter , claimant has 21 suffered great anxiety, -financial hardship, emotional trauma to her 22 family, and had her good name and reputation besmirched . She desire ; 23 to be made whole . 24 25 Dated: November 14, 1986 26 SUSAN JANE COPPA, Claimant 27 28 -3- 1 STEWART, STEWART & BRESLOW 2 THOMAS N. STEWART, III (2221GA.507) 1225 Alpine Road, Suite 200 3 Walnut Creek, CA 94.596 �.�. ,,,. (415) 932-4828 RECEIVED 4 Attorneys for Claimant E��/ 5 SUSAN JANE COPPA I MAY l/ 1987 6 P�, 7 8 9 In the Matter of the Claim of APPLICATION FOR 10 SUSAN JANE COPPA, PERMISSION TO FILE LATE CLAIM 11 Against [Gov. Code § 911. 4] 12 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY and ROBERT LAW. co 0. 20 a.o $ < ' 13 � zm R � � �no -— o�cU < d � 14 3W ¢ TO CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: r�.0ZW6 F � oaa: 15 �oK � oN Application is hereby made for permission to present the H0. aN5 � 3 ¢ ^ 3 < 16 attached claim after expiration of the time limit provided in LI 17 Government Code section 911. 2 . 18 1. As stated in the attached claim, claimant's cause of 19 action occurred on or about July 17, 1986. 20 2 . The time for presentation of such claim under Government 21 Code section 911. 2 expired on or about October 26, 1986. 22 3 . On November 14 , 1986, claimant filed her claim with the 23 clerk of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. A copy of 24 said claim is attached hereto. Said Board of Supervisors only 25 response to said claim is also attached hereto. Said response 26 fails to comply with Government Code section 911. 3 , as a result 27 of which, said Board of Supervisors has waived the right to 28 contend that claimant's claim was filed late. Claimant retains 2221GA. 507 1 1 the right, in her action against Contra Costa County and Robert 2 Law, to assert said waiver regardless of the outcome of this 3 application. 4 4 . At all times from July 15, 1986, through November 14, 5 1986, claimaint was represented either by her attorney, Mark T. 6 Susnow or Michael Tucevich. Neither of these attorneys was hired 7 in connection with any sort of civil action. Both attorneys were 8 hired exclusively to defend claimant in the criminal action. 9 On or about September 19, 1986, within the (100-day time 10 limit) , Attorney Tucevich substituted as claimant's attorney in 11 place of Attorney Susnow. From September 19, 1986 to the end of W � c 12 October, 1986, all of claimant's communications with Attorney 99.2 R < � 13 Tucevich were with regard to the defense of the criminal action. Zco �gN25. Claimant's failure to file timely her government claim W U a 14 Ai0L) �.oZWUj 15 was the result of inadvertence and excusable neglect, (Government F y p Z W $ rCL U N a° ¢ NzCO 16 Code section 911. 6) for the following reasons: J a W ^ 3v 17 Prior to December 13, 1985, claimant had acted as a F. 18 midwife on many occasions and had delivered many babies. Prior 19 to December 13 , 1985, claimant decided that because of adverse 20 publicity and legal actions relating to midwives, she would no 21 longer act as such, and instead concentrate her efforts in being 22 a simple labor coach and on opening a birthing resource center. 23 On December 13 , 1985, claimant was employed by Mr. and 24 Mrs. Jackson to act as a labor coach during Mrs. Jackson's home 25 birth, wherein Mr. Jackson had planned to deliver the baby. 26 During birth, complications arose, causing Mr. Jackson to request 27 claimant's emergency assistance. As a result of Mr. Jackson's 28 request, claimant did take over the delivery duties, did deliver 2221GA. 507 2 1 the baby, and immediately thereafter demanded that "911" be 2 called for immediate and official professional assistance. 3 On January 2 , 1986, the baby died. Treating physician, 4 Dr. Mark Usatin, of Kaiser Permanente Hospital, without the 5 benefit of an autopsy, opined that the death was caused by a lack 6 of oxygen to the baby caused by claimant's alleged substandard 7 delivery. On or about May 14 , 1986, the Contra Costa County 8 Coroner completed his report on the cause of death. The coroner, 9 with the benefit of an autopsy and referral to a neuropath- 10 ologist, concluded that there was no evidence to support the 11 theory that a lack of oxygen was involved in the baby's death. 0 12 On June 9, 1986, the Contra Costa County District co N $ ° a13 Attorney filed a complaint against claimant under Business and a W Q N O � Professions Code section 2053 . The fact that such charges were 14 a o 7 v 3<aW 'rU F. 09 2ZWWo 15 filed was reported in newspapers. of general circulation. On July h Q Z VJ CQ U CY a`taon - 16 17, 1986, an article was published in the San Francisco Chronicle ¢a ^ < a F3 - 17 newspaper in which a Deputy District Attorney of Contra Costa 18 County stated that the baby died because of claimant's 19 incompetence and subsequent coverup. 20 On July 17, 1986, until she was acquitted after a jury 21 trial on December 18, 1986, claimant's life was in constant 22 turmoil. Media reporters constantly called her. Numerous news- 23 paper and television stories were published. Public rallies were 24 held in her support. Claimant made numerous court appearances. 25 Claimant was constantly worried that justice might not prevail 26 and that she might be sent to prison, as is authorized under 27 Business and Professions Code section 2053 . On December 28, 28 1986, the Contra Costa Times listed claimant's legal battle as 2221GA. 507 3 a ` 1 one the major Contra Costa County stories of 1986, a copy of 2 which is attached hereto. 3 On September 10, 1986, claimant appeared in court and 4 offered to plead guilty to the lesser charge of violation of 5 Business and Professions Code section 2052 . Deputy District 6 Attorney, Robert Law, refused to accept this plea bargain. Based 7 on his refusal, plaintiff was caused to believe that the District 8 Attorney's Office had obtained some evidence tending to claim 9 that claimant had caused the death of the baby. The District 10 Attorney's refusal made it appear that that claimant did not have 11 a bonafide claim against Contra Costa County and Robert Law. a12 On November 4 , 1986, in court, a Deputy District � m a ° $ ° CV 13 Attorney stated that there was a typographical error in the W _ N v 3 H Z C7 14 complaint and that all along, claimant should have been charged OGU < 0M v Q v > 0 HyoWW8 15 with violation of Business and Professions Code section 2052, not y Q Z W O Q < H CM 16 Business and Professions Code section 2053 . Claimant contends J a F ' 3 ` 17 that there was no typographical error in the initial complaint. 18 This was the first time that claimant realized that the District 19 Attorney did not have any evidence to support the original 20 charges and that the Deputy District Attorney's statements to the 21 news media had no supporting evidence. Thus, as a result of 22 unsup- portable allegations which were either intentionally or 23 negligently made by the District Attorney, claimant was delayed 24 in presenting her government claim. 25 6. Claimant should be granted permission to file a late 26 claim if she failed to file her original claim within 100 days 27 through "excusable neglect". Claimant submits that the constant 28 court appearances, requests by the media for interviews, rallies 2221GA.507 4 1 by her supporters, false charges by the District Attorney, media 2 coverage, and general fright at what she perceived as a legal 3 system gone haywire, constitute a sufficient excuse for filing 4 her government claim 20 days late. 5 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is 6 true and correct and that this declaration was executed on 7 May 8, 1987 at Walnut Creek, California. 9 SUSAN JANE (P-OPPA 10 11 3 0 12 � Go wC oa " 99.2 N V a 13 3 � z �I R CC auao� a 14 Q AioL)i 3rWi o w.czwz w u1 15 CC F y p � U N 16 Q Q N J ll7 3 C Fw. v 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2221GA.507 5 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 December 16 , 1986 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: $50, 000. 00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please not all "WARN Coun � angel N,� CLAIMANT: SUSAIQ COPPA `AOV Is 1986 c/o Michael Tucevich ATTORNEY: Attorney At LawCA 94553 2400 Sycamore Drive Date received Martinez, ADDRESS: Suite 40 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON November 14., 1986 hand del . Antioch,, CA 94509 no envelope BY MAIL POSTMARKED: 1. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. §YIL BATCHELOR, Clerk DATED: November 17 . 19w'6 eputy L. Hall 11. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (�) This claim compl 'es ubstantially with Sections 910 and 910.2.J/ his cl AILS to 'com 1 substantial) with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying ( ) �l comply Y claimant'. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8).. (�() Claim is not timely fil A TheCek should rel:64 claim on ground that it wa filed l&tjA&2nMn warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). ( ) Other: Dated: /v��' �gi /y�� BY: V Deputy County Counsel III. FROM. Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2) (x) 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. (X ) Other: Portion of oriprinal claim not previously returned as untimely is rejected in full. I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: DEC 16 MS 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 email 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: DEC 171986 BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by ! 'Deputy Clerk CC: County Counsel County Administrator 1 MICHAEL TUCEVICH, Esq . 2400 Sycamore Drive , Suite 40 2 Antioch , CA 94509 Telephone : (414)439-8381 3 Attorney for Claimant 4 CLAIM AGAINST THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 5 6 TO: Clerk , Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 7 County Administration Bldg Martinez , CA 94553 8 CLAIMANT' S NAME: Susan CoppaC�i 9 CLAIMANT' S ADDRESS : 857 Litwin Drive f 10 Concord,',' �A 94f 18 AMOUNT OF CLAIM: $50 ,000 11 r� I ADDRESS TO NOTICES ARE 12 TO BE SENT: MICHAEL TUCEVICH Attorney at Law 13 2400 Sycamore Drive , Suite 40 Antioch , CA 94509 14 15 DATE OF OCCURANCE: July 17 through the present 16 PLACE OF OCCURANCE: Concord, California 17 MANNER IN WHICH CLAIM AROSE: 18 Claimant was present at a home birth of a Concord couple. The 19 mother , Rosetta Jackson, had previously gone to Kaiser Hospital for 20 a prenatal examination and informed her .Kaiser physican that she 21 was to have a home birth (this being her third child and the previous 22 two having been delivered : at home) . Mrs . Jackson experienced a 23 difficult delivery, the baby being eleven pounds and the shoulders 24 unable to clear the birth canal . In the midst of an emergency 25 situation, claimant was able to extricate the baby. The baby 26 emerged. not breathing, claimant called for immediate medical 27 assistance and proceeded to revive the baby via CPR to the extent 28 the baby was breathing normally upon the arrival of the paramedics . -1- I The parents declined to have the baby transported to a hospital , 2 signed a medical release to that effect , and the paramedics left 3 labeling the non-transport ai'dry run:` 4 Three days thereafter the baby was taken to Kaiser Hospital , 5 and three weeks thereafter the baby died in Kaiser ' s care. Kaiser 6 doctors misdiagnosed the cause of death as due to brain damage 7 resulting from oxygen deprivation at birth . They declined to sign 8 the death certificate and notified police authorities that the mid if 9 in attendance was responsible for the baby' s death . 10 The coroner ' s office, in an effort to determine the cause of 11 death to the infant , sought the expertise of a neuropathologist 12 who determined the cause of death to be NOT related to the birth 13 or to any action whatsoever on the part of claimant . Specifically, 14 the neuropathologist , Dr . Janice Borcich , attributed the cause of 15 death to congenital birth defects to wit : Leigh ' s disease , Kidney 16 failure , and liver disease . The expert further concluded the baby wou 17 have died no matter where the delivery took place and found absolu el: 18 no fault with claimant ' s actions . She so advised the respective 19 police authorities and the District Attorney ' s office of her findings 20 dated May 14, 1986 . 21 Despite conclusive medical evidence to the contrary, the district 22 attorney 's office filed criminal charges against the claimant 23 alleging her to be responsible for the death of the baby. On July 24 14, 1986 the SF Chronicle qoute ' s Deputy DA Robert Law as follows , 25 "I think we 've got a woman who caused the death of a child, in part 26 by incompentence and in part by covering her own tracks . " This 27 statement was false when made and known to be false by the DA' s 28 office . -2- 1 Officials from the DA's office continued to press claimant for 2 a plea of guilty to the allegation alluding to the baby's death. 3 Said charge has since been dismissed against the claimant 4 following an evidentiary hearing at which claimant was obligated t 5 prove her innocence. -Up until that hearing the DA's office consistent 6 maintained that claimant was responsible for the baby 's death and 7 so represented to the various courts and news media. At the hearing 8 the Judge , Walter Rodgers , inquired from the bench of the DA wheter 9 any evidence existed to support the allegation against claimant. Th 10 Deputy DA, Jose Marin, replied , "the matter is still under investig t• 11 ion." It was not until the following court appearance that the DA' s 12 office reversed themselves and proclaimed for the first time that 13 the death allegation was a "clerical error. " That pronouncement was 14 also false and known to be false inasmuch as the claimant through her 15 previous attorney had attempted to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser 16 charge of practicing midwifery without a license. Claimant ' s offer 17 was spurned and the DA's office sought a jail sentence for the 18 claimant. 19 As a direct and proximate result of the DA's office ' s false 20 statements and malicious prosecution of this matter , claimant has 21 suffered great anxiety, .financial hardship, emotional trauma to her 22 family, and had her good name and reputation besmirched . She desire 23 to be made whole. 24 25 ated: November 14, 1986 26 SUSAN JANE COPPA, Claimant 27 28• -3- w c wog CD n > CD W ` N ° aan �� CD � u� � a� N= < s n'w pN °' C —D� �CCDD at° o 3. 5750 _� o 21 mCn _ O a j m j cn V E, ► l! �? a N � a� O m.� CD �O O a° =, 1 r of m Cr(n °' a� �3Cy- ° �af..c a�—� 3 may o �D.�, o-ca f m o a° _ 0 3 p to CD a3c3D �w�O �o wl CDD c3D O cn7'� 0CDCDDSDn � � pc a7m � cw ° aw an ��o� �c aOw o o f ° CLCL2 w w �O o m aw am in ?�mm o N x CL m5 �, D °' m w m w O Qc-) = coo' an m c c>.�� n COD U) CCD (n O j En ��- `�. 3—W `D L CD 3 F).mw o f �� °o �o w 3 0 Nm O Ccc cl m ° m _ c �pmD �a� o na0 - or -.(o '. w� cmm b -�pa ?d CD (onDc w < 4 O CD � � W " m w CD CL an 0 a? �ap CL C-- Tw w`c.�Q F -0 w� ` m Cl o - _.a m 0 ° N CD - an Qaa„m < ° O OL " o m w a ' o O �.w c w � Q: w " W, C—) 7 - an 5 m ? S >>•C7 m m an 0 O 3 aD a m p m w(O O on 3 � azr CL� ncoa��3000 "O m m C p 0 m -m m 0 n� a m w Q w .w'p w a <'N OL 3 pa'C ': w o �. 7 p Qpm 0� m CD mCD m w e ° O a `z cn 3 o m w vwi w 3 5 Cn0 an D Fr CT()(0 m C)0 0)(0 0 C— :, n:': w< 1,, b w ° vp-CD (Dp - p � o x N ma N--o a 07 Q j 5 w m C o(D <' =r (p fn �c�p m 00Q < j wOm m 1 _ < 0 m m cn 0 CD p C 3 CO a d m a 0 - 7 N N N m w ,�a CL a D m v �o m .�M m ; COD w ?m(O acn ° aC�� �p�an:C cn an �, mmp �w mU) �, v ^mow w Q^ wO U) m a O O .< w m O N' 3 a 7 a^ CL - w m a g d Qw � CD - w m c� �n �c Nmm , ° t�?? �O a m N 7 cn c ��N n aDaN—� r¢ .rF ai O an N °j �' A rn �p� Fn.a �� CD Cr =rX -i O 7 w ° =(a ° mato c� °� = � 0 °am m m m 3 Sao � .w m m �� -inmmom > > o a � r cn 1 STEWART, STEWART & BRESLOW 2 THOMAS N. STEWART, III (2221DC. 507) 1225 Alpine Road, Suite 200 3 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 y' (415) 932-4828 4 Attorneys for Claimant 5 SUSAN JANE COPPA I PIP, ' I 6 7 6 9 In the Matter of the Claim of DECLARATION OF 10 SUSAN JANE COPPA, MICHAEL TUCEVICH IN SUPPORT OF 11 Against APPLICATION FOR 3 PERMISSION TO 0 12 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY and ROBERT LAW. FILE LATE CLAIM �oCM m / [Gov. Code § 911.4] U, ZZ, rn 13 N2 � azU < dn a 14 a�„ o I, MICHAEL TUCEVICH, declare: Fy p ¢ Zw yW $ 15 v�o � 5c¢iN 1. I am duly licensed to practice law in the State of N 3< 3v 16 California and .in October, 1986, was SUSAN JANE COPPA's attorney w 17 of record in her criminal action. 18 2 . On or about September 19 , 1986, I informed claimant's 19 prior attorney, Mark T. Susnow, that I would be substituting in 20 his place as SUSAN JANE COPPA's attorney of record. Attorney 21 Susnow's office is in San Rafael, California. On or about 22 September 21, 1986, I received a letter from Attorney Susnow 23 asking that I talk with his secretary and make arrangements to 24 pick up the case file, which I had not previously seen. 25 3 . I made arrangements with Attorney Susnow's office that 26 the file be mailed to me. I received the file, which was 27 approximately five and one-half inches thick, in the mail on 28 approximately October 3 , 1986. 2221DC. 507 1_ 1 4 . It took me approximately until October 10, 1986 to read 2 and understand the entire file. I spent approximately two days 3 researching the various legal issues involved with the criminal 4 case. I spent significant parts of four separate days educating 5 myself on various aspects of childbirth. I made court appear- 6 ances in the Coppa criminal action on October 7, 9, 15, 22 , and 7 29 . Thus, during the entire month of October, 1986, I was 8 completely occupied with preparing for the criminal action. 9 5. On approximately November 4 , 1986, a Deputy District 10 Attorney stated in court that SUSAN JANE COPPA should have been 11 charged with violating B & P Code section 2052, not B & P Code 00, 12 section 2053 . Until that time, I assumed that the District Wo N a ° Rol 13 Attorney's Office had some evidence supporting the allegation � � 3Pzc a < ooa 14 that SUSAN JANE COPPA had violated B & P Code section 2053 , which ¢� > oc`) " Hy o W WS 15 refers to the defendant causing a death. y Q Z W a a < N Z 16 6. In a discovery motion before The Honorable John D. ¢a ' < a H3 - 17 Hatzenbuhler on November 14 , 1986, Judge Hatzenbuhler stated: 18 "There was a -- she was overcharged to begin with, whether inadvertently or with malice I am not going to comment on. " 19 Later in the day, on November 14, 1986, SUSAN JANE COPPA's 20 government claim was filed. 21 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is 22 true and correct and that this declaration was executed on 23 May 1987 at Walnut Creek, California. 24 (� / 25 k_L AJC MICHAEL TUCEVICH 26 27 28 2221DC.507 2 1 STEWART, STEWART & BRESLOW 2 THOMAS N. STEWART, III (2221CL. 511) 1225 Alpine Road, Suite 200 3 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (415) 932-4828 4 Attorneys for Claimant 5 6 7 8 CLAIM AGAINST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY ROBERT LAW 9 10 TO: Clerk, Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 11 County Administration Building Martinez, CA 94553 3 0 12 N co Claimant submits the following government claim against � W c o `a ao 0 0 N � � 13 LL oe 14 Contra Costa County and Deputy District Attorney Robert Law: oCU < � v O U w.o Z W W g 1. Claimant's name: Susan Jane Coppa. F- yozW15 w J CC U N co a° a Z u, 16 2 . Claimant's address: 857 Litwin Drive 3 a _ 3v Concord, California 94518. a 17 3 . Mailing address: c/o Thomas N. Stewart, III 18 Stewart, Stewart & Breslow 1225 Alpine Road, Suite 200 19 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 20 4 . Date of occurrence: on or about July 16, 1986. 21 5. Place of occurrence: Concord, California. 22 6. Circumstances giving rise to this claim and claimant's 23 damages caused thereby: 24 On or about July 16, 1986, Contra Costa County Deputy 25 District Attorney, Robert Law, was interviewed by San Francisco 26 Chronicle reporter, Elaine Herscher, regarding a criminal 27 complaint which had been filed by the Contra Costa County 28 District Attorney against claimant. In that interview, Robert 2221CL. 511 1 1 Law stated to Elaine Herscher: 2 "I think we've got a woman who caused the death of a child, in part by incompetence and in part by covering her own 3 tracks. " 4 The statement was false. When Robert Law made the 5 statement, he either knew it was false or had no reasonable 6 grounds to believe it was true. When Robert Law made this 7 statement, he possessed the coroner's report and investigator's 8 reports indicating that the death of the child in question was 9 unrelated to acts of claimant and that claimaint had not been 10 involved in any coverup affecting the death of the child. 11 When Robert. Law made the statement to Elaine Herscher, he 12 had every reason to believe that the statement would be published ti � m oWc.o � 13 in the San Francisco Chronicle. The statement was published in ~ a: ' ( ,O � the July 17, 1986, !edition of the San Francisco Chronicle. CtiU a o Qv14 a a r2 Q " F.2ZWWS 15 Publication of the statement in the San Francisco Chronicle �k/-� N Q Z W /J O Q Q ~ N 16 caused claimant great embarrassment, caused her to be shunned by a ¢ ^ Q "' H3 ` 17 friends and associates, and otherwise caused her great emotional v� 18 distress. Claimant contends that said publication has caused her 19 to lose money, because various certificated midwives and organi- 20 zations have refused to hire her as a labor coach. 21 Insofar as is .known at the present, claimant has suffered 22 general damages because of embarrassment, shunning and distress 23 for which $100, 000 would compensate her. Claimant has suffered 24 economic damages as a result of the statement, which amount is 25 not presently known. Claimant further seeks punitive damages 26 against Robert Law in the amount of $100, 000 to punish him for 27 the statement which he maliciously made. 28 Robert Law's statement was not privileged under C.C. § 47, 2221CL. 511 2 r 4 1 and neither Robert Law nor Contra Costa County are immune [see 2 Lipman v. Brisbane Elementary School (1961) 55 Cal.2d 224] . 3 Notwithstanding the fact that the statement begins with 4 "I think. . .", the statement is defamatory under the circumstances 5 [Baker v. Los Angeles Herald Examiner (1986) 42 Cal. 3d 254, 266] . 6 Dated: May 11, 1987 7 STEWART, STEWART & BRESLOW 8 9 THOMAS N. IMEWART, III 10 Attorneys for Claimant 11 3 0 12 H ccpop � 13 aU < 6La 14 C) F.yoiLU 15 Cr J U N O < < rn 16 ' O F v 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2221CL.511 3 PROOF OF SERVICE BY PERSONAL DELIVERY I � THOMAS N. STEWART, III declare: I am a citizen of the United States and am employed in the County of Contra Costa ; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to this action; my business address is 1225 Alpine Road, Suite 200, Walnut Creek, California, 94596. On May 11 , 19 87 , I personally served the Government Claim dated May 11, 1987, Application for Permission to File Late Claim, and Declaration of Michael Tucevich in Support of Application to File Late Claim on the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in this action by personally delivering a true copy thereof at the following location: Contra Costa County Administration Building Martinez, California Executed on May 11 , 19 87 at Walnut Creek, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct . THOMAS N. STEWART, III