Suing Public Entities PDF

*Suing Public Entities* A group of people in a classroom Description automatically generated Most bullying cases are more on emotional hurt than physical abuse. A versus logo with blue squares and a...

*Suing Public Entities* A group of people in a classroom Description automatically generated Most bullying cases are more on emotional hurt than physical abuse. A versus logo with blue squares and a lightning bolt Description automatically generated Deposition of school \[district\] liability experts whose main issue was "it's not mandatory duty of the school to investigate stuff \[referring to bullying cases?\], only discretionary\] - Raised in motion in limine   Do they have immunity? Yes. \[there is immunity if there is mandatory duty\] here, th ey deny that there is a mandatory duty, so there really is no breach of that duty. Sample immunity: acting under scope A screenshot of a phone Description automatically generated Mandatory duty, negligence = mutually exclusive? So include these other causes of action  A book with text overlay Description automatically generated Safety plans against earthquake, school shooting, etc. A close-up of a document Description automatically generated vicarious liability  Ex: school nurse - student who was always shaken during lunch Under gov code 840 used for employees hired by govt public entities for dangerous conditions in the sidewalk (eg. director of the street services of the city, name them in the govt claim too, not necessary in premises liability cases) A grey background with white text Description automatically generated For sexual abuse, cooperate with the DA (district attorney?)/prosecutors rather than being against them. A close-up of a blue and white sign Description automatically generatedA white background with black text Description automatically generated Government cases are expensive general - require experts Trivial defect is the main issue \> Case Selection - for premises cases, they rarely settle even for private entities Take cases that are worth your while. Avoid soft tissue cases.   When you make a claim against a government entity, they are not liable for negligence. They are only liable by statute. Plead Gov Code 835 - dangerous condition of public property Available form complaint - now available online Important to use the updated form so you can plead causes of action completely and correctly in order to obtain relief. Dont check the box in the form just because it sounds good. 830.2 - trivial defect doctrine = if the risk is trivial, no liability A white paper with black text Description automatically generated 2019 case provided clearer parameters of what is trivial The city always claims it doesn\'t have money to fix the defective condition on the sidewalks, but have money to hire medical experts - a ridiculous argument Read the case, as it gives a set of scenarios. Lighting (bad lighting casts a shadow on the trivial defect) plays a factor, trees or leaves obstructions, etc. Totality of the circumstances test = 1 inch defect plus other factors. You have to show that under this test, the conditions of the area make the trivial defect a dangerous condition still.. What about open and obvious? Commonly misunderstood by people.it doesnt relieve a property owner of his duty to keep his property safe. Doesnt get them off the hook. - misused by the defense Open and obvious just means they do not have the duty to WARN, but they have a duty to still make the premises safe. Plaintiff comparative negligence argument. Tip: read the CACI instructions, but read the used? Notes. Because if you just listen to the defense, your burden of proof seems to go higher and higher. "Don't believe that the defense lawyer tells you. Do your own research." You can only make a [public information/records request] during pre-litigation. Once the case enters into litigation, you cannot do it. Do government entities need any prior notice of the defective condition? Of course. They have the same obligation/same burden of proof - actual or constructive notice. Homeowners are liable when their trees' roots cause the adjacent sidewalk to be a dangerous condition. If it is foreseeable that the condition n your property can cause a harm to the adjacent property, even if it's a public property. The city is liable because it has to fix the dangerous condition. But some cities (like in LA) have statutes providing that the homeowners are responsible for the sidewalk in front of their property. So sue both. Strategy - the insurance of the homeowners settle faster