Preview
1 ADAM REISNER, ESQ., (State Bar No. 204351)
TESSA KING, ESQ., (State Bar No. 251408)
2 LILIT DEMIRTCHIAN, ESQ., (State Bar No. 351437)
REISNER & KING LLP
3
15303Ventura Blvd., Suite 1260
4 Sherman Oaks, California 91403
Phone: (818) 981-0901
5 Fax: (818) 981-0902
6
Attorneys for PLAINTIFF MAITE MARTINEZ, as guardian ad litem for ABEL DAVILA JR.
7
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN
10
) Case No.:
11 MAITE MARTINEZ, as guardian ad litem for )
)
12 ABEL DAVILA JR., ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES:
)
13 Plaintiff, ) (1) NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION;
)
14 ) (2) VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA
vs. ) EDUCATION CODE §44807;
15 )
DELANO JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL ) (3) NEGLIGENCE
16 DISTRICT; )
ROBERT F. KENNEDY HIGH SCHOOL, )
17 ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
and DOES 1 THROUGH 100, inclusive. )
18 )
Defendants. )
19 )
)
20 )
)
21
22 ///
23 ///
24 ///
25
COMES NOW PLAINTIFF ABEL DAVILA JR., (hereinafter referred to as “DAVILA.” or
26
“Plaintiff”),” by and through his Guardian ad Litem, MAITE MARTINEZ (hereinafter referred to as
27
“Ms. Martinez”) complains against the above-named Defendants and for causes of action against the
28
Defendants, and each of them, as follows:
1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 I.
2 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
3 Negligent Supervision
4 [California Education Code § 44807]
5 Against All Defendants & DOES 21 Through 100, Inclusive
6
1. This Court has jurisdiction over the claims alleged herein. The relief requested is within the
7
jurisdiction of this Court.
8
2. Venue is proper in the County Kern as Defendants conduct business in Kern County and the
9
claims alleged herein arose in the County of Kern.
10
3. At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff DAVILA was, and now is, an individual domiciled and
11
residing in the Delano, County of Kern, State of California.
12
4. At all times mentioned herein, Maite Martinez was, and now is, an individual domiciled and
13
residing in the County of Kern, State of California, and is, and at all times relevant herein was, the
14
15 mother and guardian of DAVILA.
16 5. Plaintiff DAVILA is a minor male, age 15, born September 25, 2008, and his mother, Ms.
17 Maite Martinez, is Guardian Ad Litem of Plaintiff DAVILA, to prosecute Plaintiff DAVILA’s claims.
18 6. At all times mentioned herein, Robert F. Kennedy High School is, and at all relevant times
19 was, a school operated by, and under the management and control of, The Delano Joint Union High
20 School District, its governing board, officers, and employees. Robert F. Kennedy High School is
21 located at 1401 Hiett Ave, County of Kern, State of California.
22 7. At all times mentioned, defendants DELANO JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
23 and ROBERT F. KENNEDY HIGH SCHOOL (hereinafter referred to as “DJUHSD”) is, and at all
24
relevant times was, a public entity provided instruction for students, organized and existing under the
25
laws of the State of California.
26
8. At all times mentioned herein, DJUHSD and DOES 1 through 100, is, and at all relevant times
27
herein was, responsible for management, supervision, and control of the students, in accordance with
28
state and local laws.
2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 9. At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff is, and at all relevant times was, enrolled as a student
2
Robert F. Kennedy High School, and is, and at all relevant times was, a resident of Kern County, State
3
of California.
4
10. At all times mentioned herein, Defendant Teacher DOE (hereinafter referred to as and
5
collectively with all other Defendants as “Defendants”), was, and now is, an individual residing in the
6
County of Kern, State of California, and was an Agent, Principal, and/or Employee of Defendant
7
DJUHSD and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them.
8
11. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities, whether corporate, associate, individual,
9
or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and therefore sues said
10
11 Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave of Court to amend this Complaint to
12 assert the true names and capacities of the fictitiously named Defendants when the same have been
13 ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each Defendant designated as
14 “DOES” herein is legally responsible for the events, happenings, acts, occurrences, indebtedness,
15 damages and liabilities hereinafter alleged and caused injuries and damages proximately thereby to
16 the Plaintiff, as hereinafter alleged.
17 12. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendant DOES 1 through 100, and
18 therefore sues these defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this complaint to state
19 the true names of defendants DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, when they have been ascertained.
20
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each Defendant so named is responsible in
21
some manner for the injuries and damages suffered by Plaintiff as set forth.
22
13. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the Defendants named herein
23
has, at all times relevant to this action, been the officer, agent, employee and/or representative of the
24
remaining Defendants and has acted within the course and scope of such agency and employment, and
25
with the permission and consent of the co-defendants.
26
14. Pursuant to California Government Code §§ 900 et seq., Plaintiff filed a tort claim on or about
27
December 13, 2023, which was rejected by Defendant DJUHSD on or about January 16, 2024.
28
3
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Attached, hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibits “A” and “B” are said tort claim form and notice
2
of rejection, respectfully.
3
15. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, had a duty at all
4
times to supervise the conduct of students on the grounds of Robert F. Kennedy High School, and to
5
enforce the regulations necessary for the students’ protection, and to exercise ordinary care to prevent
6
physical injury to said students, and to provide safe and supervised equipment for them to use, and to
7
comply with the Individualized Education Plan for Plaintiff DAVILA, as codified under California
8
Education Code §44807 and otherwise.
9
16. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, failed to
10
11 reasonable supervise Plaintiff DAVILA, resulting in Plaintiff DAVILA suffering harm that was
12 foreseeable by the school and school officials; and Plaintiff DAVILA suffered actual quantifiable harm
13 due to the negligent supervision of the school and school officials.
14 17. Plaintiff was diagnosed with autism at the age of 3 and has since struggled asking for help.
15 Furthermore, Plaintiff struggled with bullying in both middle and high school. He did not know much
16 information about himself or his mother.
17 18. Plaintiff was bullied on campus, and he was often chased around the school by a student. Even
18 though they informed Defendant DJUHSD about the bullying and the Defendant DJUHSD had
19 security walking around campus, they claimed to never see anything.
20
19. In or around August of 2023, Ms. Martinez met with Defendant DJUHSD, including the Vice
21
Principal to discuss Plaintiff’s Individualized Education Plan (“IEP”). As a result, Defendant DJUHSD
22
and staff agreed to enroll Plaintiff DAVILA in special education classes and keep an eye on him.
23
20. Due to his autism, Plaintiff DAVILA would not raise his hand to ask for help and was non-
24
verbal; however, per the IEP, he was supposed to be under constant supervision while at school.
25
21. In or around August 2023, unbeknownst to Ms. Martinez, Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in
26
a woodshop class. When Ms. Martinez received Plaintiff DAVILA’s schedule, it only identified the
27
names of his teachers but did not identify that Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in woodshop class.
28
4
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 22. Notably, when Plaintiff took a woodshop class in the prior year as a freshman, Ms. Martinez
2
was not only informed but also kept in contact with the woodshop teacher. Additionally, that prior
3
year, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher assured Ms. Martinez that he would not be hands-on while in class,
4
and in the case that he was ever using equipment, Plaintiff DAVILA would receive extra assistance,
5
direct supervision and monitoring.
6
23. In 2023, Plaintiff’s woodshop class was not taught by a trained woodshop teacher, but rather a
7
business teacher who lacked the requisite skill to instruct and safely monitor the woodshop students,
8
and without the skill or experience to safely supervise and monitor Plaintiff DAVILA’s disabilities.
9
Furthermore, this year, unlike the previous year, Plaintiff’s teacher placed him on a machine by
10
11 himself without any supervision. The equipment used was dangerously old, rusty, and in poor
12 condition.
13 24. On or around August 30, 2023, when Plaintiff was only 14 years old, and Plaintiff’s woodshop
14 teacher left the class leaving Plaintiff DAVILA and the other students unattended. The woodshop
15 teacher was not informed by Defendant DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, and did not know
16 Plaintiff DAVILA was diagnosed with autism or needed supervision. The woodshop teacher did not
17 pay attention to Plaintiff DAVILA. Defendant DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, negligently failed
18 to instruct and inform the woodshop teacher of Plaintiff DAVILA’s special needs.
19 25. As a direct result of Defendant’s failure to supervise and negligent supervision, Plaintiff had
20
access to and used a dangerous table saw on his own, without the appropriate safeguards, in violation
21
of his IEP requirements, resulting in his lacerating three of his fingertips, taking off the top of his
22
finger bones.
23
26. Upon a phone call from Defendant’s, Ms. Martinez rushed to the school to find his 14-year-
24
old son drenched in blood. Shocked at the sight of her son’s alarming condition, Ms. Martinez grew
25
highly concerned and wondered why her son had been left bleeding heavily for approximately one
26
hour under Defendant DJUHSD’s supervision. Notably, Ms. Martinez had previously signed a consent
27
form permitting Defendant DJUHSD to make the decision to allow Plaintiff to go inside an ambulance
28
without her consent in emergency situations. Despite these directives, Defendants DJUHSD and
5
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 DOES 1 through 100, failed to promptly transport Plaintiff DAVILA to the hospital for medical care,
2
exacerbating his injuries.
3
27. Plaintiff was then taken to the hospital.
4
28. Upon arrival to the hospital, Plaintiff had suffered such significant blood loss that as a
5
precaution, the hospital staff asked Ms. Martinez to sign a blood transfusion consent form.
6
29. Once the hospital staff removed the temporary gauze from Plaintiff’s fingertips, blood
7
immediately began squirting all over. Plaintiff DAVILA needed reconstruction surgery because it
8
chipped bones on the tips of index and middle finger. Plaintiff DAVILA’s third finger needed special
9
glue to seal the skin. The hospital wrapped Plaintiff DAVILA’s hand, gave him pain medication, and
10
11 sent him to Visalia to go see a surgeon. Plaintiff DAVILA was made to wait 4-5 days and then had
12 surgery at the hospital in Visalia.
13 30. As a result of Defendant’s negligent supervision, Plaintiff suffered from severe and debilitating
14 injuries to his fingers which required emergency medical treatment and surgeries, and suffered from
15 severe emotional distress, and pain and suffering.
16 31. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Martinez asked the Vice Principle for a statement regarding the
17 incident, he stated that he would provide the statement on the following day, once he spoke with the
18 other students. However, the Vice Principle later stated that he would not share the students’
19 statements.
20
32. Shortly after the incident, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher called Ms. Martinez and profusely
21
apologized for the incident. The teacher also explained that he was in fact not a woodshop teacher but
22
a business teacher who had been offered the opportunity to teach woodshop. He further explained that
23
he was not even aware that Plaintiff was on the Individualized Education Plan or had autism, and had
24
not been monitoring Plaintiff DAVILA at the time of the accident.
25
33. Since the incident, Plaintiff has not gone to school. Even though the school has contacted Ms.
26
Martinez asking about her son’s attendance, her son has stayed home and she has done everything to
27
protect her son’s health and safety since he is now in need of further care and treatment.
28
6
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 34. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, are responsible
2
for these incidents as they had been expressly made aware of the dangerous nature of the woodshop
3
class, had enrolled Plaintiff in the class without notifying his mother in violation of the IEP and school
4
policy, failed to provide safe equipment to Plaintiff and the training and supervision to successfully
5
use the machine without injury, and failed to take any remedial measures.
6
35. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff was physically harmed, traumatized, lost a
7
significant amount of blood, requiring surgeries and therapy, and has incurred months of pain and
8
suffering, and will continue to suffer in the future.
9
36. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, negligently and
10
11 carelessly failed to use ordinary care in the discharge of their duties to supervise students to prevent
12 them from harming other students in that there was no adequate supervision.
13 37. As a direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100,
14 Plaintiff was rendered and/or may be rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and/or disordered, both
15 internally and externally, and/or suffered and/or may suffer, among other things, numerous internal
16 injuries, severe fright, shock, pain, discomfort, and/or anxiety.
17 38. As a further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100,
18 Plaintiff has been forced and/or will be forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and/or
19 laboratory costs during the period of Plaintiff’s disability, and is informed and believes, and thereon
20
alleges, he may be and/or will in the future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same nature,
21
all in an amount which is at present unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show the exact
22
amount of said expenses at the time of trial.
23
39. Prior to the occurrence of the incidents, Plaintiff was an able-bodied individual, but since said
24
incidents has been fully and/or partially incapacitated, all to Plaintiff’s damage in an amount which is
25
at present unascertained.
26
40. As a further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through
27
100, Plaintiff has been caused and/or may be caused, and did suffer and/or may suffer, and continues
28
to suffer severe and permanent emotional and/or mental distress and/or anguish, humiliation,
7
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort, and/or anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said
2
injuries is presently unknown to Plaintiff, who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they
3
are ascertained.
4
41. By the aforesaid acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been
5
directly and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 3333 including, but
6
not limited to, potential loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and related expenses for
7
care and procedures both now and in the future, attorney’s fees, and/or other pecuniary loss not
8
presently ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend when ascertained.
9
42. As a result of the harassing acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, as alleged herein,
10
11 Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of said suit as specifically provided in
12 California 1021.5.
13 43. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
14 II.
15 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
16 Violation of California Education Code § 44807
17 Against All Defendants & DOES 1 through 100, Inclusive
18 44. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference each and every paragraph in this Complaint as though
19 duly set forth in full herein.
20 45. At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff belonged to the class of persons whom those laws were
21 designed to protect. The harm which has befallen Plaintiff is of a type the state and local laws were
22 designed to prevent.
23
46. California Education Code § 44807 imposes upon public school districts a mandatory duty to
24
supervise pupils while on school grounds: “Every teacher in the public schools shall hold pupils to a
25
strict account for their conduct on the way to and from school, on the playgrounds, or during recess.”
26
Either a total lack of supervision or ineffective supervision may constitute a lack of care on the part of
27
those responsible for student supervision.
28
8
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 47. California Education Code § 44807 imposes on school authorities a general duty to supervise
2
pupils on school property during school hours in order to “ ‘regulate their conduct so as to prevent
3
disorderly and dangerous practices which are likely to result in physical injury to immature scholars
4
under their custody.’ ”
5
48. Under California Government Code § 815.6, a school district is civilly liable for injuries
6
proximately caused by such lack of care: “Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed
7
by an enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the public
8
entity is liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to discharge the duty.”
9
49. Under California Government Code § 815.6, Defendants DJUHSD and DOES 1 through 100,
10
11 and each of them, were under a mandatory duty to supervise at all times the conduct of students on the
12 school grounds and to enforce those rules and regulations for their protection. The acts and omissions
13 of Defendants, and each of them, as alleged herein, violated State and local laws, inter alia, California
14 Education Code § 44807.
15 50. At all relevant times Plaintiff DAVILA was under the supervision of Defendant DJUHSD and
16 DOES 1 through 100, who were required to supervise and regulate Plaintiff DAVILA’s conduct while
17 on campus, including during woodshop class, a school-related and encouraged function involving
18 activities taking place during school hours, where Plaintiff was seriously injured.
19 51. In or around August of 2023, Ms. Martinez met with Defendant DJUHSD, including the Vice
20
Principal to discuss Plaintiff’s Individualized Education Plan (“IEP”). As a result, Defendant DJUHSD
21
and staff agreed to enroll Plaintiff DAVILA in special education classes and keep an eye on him.
22
52. Due to his autism, Plaintiff DAVILA would not raise his hand to ask for help and was non-
23
verbal; however, per the IEP, he was supposed to be under constant supervision while at school.
24
53. In or around August 2023, unbeknownst to Ms. Martinez, Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in
25
a woodshop class. When Ms. Martinez received Plaintiff DAVILA’s schedule, it only identified the
26
names of his teachers but did not identify that Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in woodshop class.
27
54. Notably, when Plaintiff took a woodshop class in the prior year as a freshman, Ms. Martinez
28
was not only informed but also kept in contact with the woodshop teacher. Additionally, that prior
9
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 year, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher assured Ms. Martinez that he would not be hands-on while in class,
2
and in the case that he was ever using equipment, Plaintiff DAVILA would receive extra assistance,
3
direct supervision and monitoring.
4
55. In 2023, Plaintiff’s woodshop class was not taught by a trained woodshop teacher, but rather a
5
business teacher who lacked the requisite skill to instruct and safely monitor the woodshop students,
6
and without the skill or experience to safely supervise and monitor Plaintiff DAVILA’s disabilities.
7
Furthermore, this year, unlike the previous year, Plaintiff’s teacher placed him on a machine by
8
himself without any supervision. The equipment used was dangerously old, rusty, and in poor
9
condition.
10
11 56. On or around August 30, 2023, when Plaintiff was only 14 years old, and Plaintiff’s woodshop
12 teacher left the class leaving Plaintiff DAVILA and the other students unattended. The woodshop
13 teacher was not informed by Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, and did not know
14 Plaintiff DAVILA was diagnosed with autism or needed supervision. The woodshop teacher did not
15 pay attention to Plaintiff DAVILA. Defendant DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, negligently failed
16 to instruct and inform the woodshop teacher of Plaintiff DAVILA’s special needs.
17 57. As a direct result of Defendant’s failure to supervise and negligent supervision, Plaintiff had
18 access to and used a dangerous table saw on his own, without the appropriate safeguards, in violation
19 of his IEP requirements, resulting in his lacerating three of his fingertips, taking off the top of his
20
finger bones.
21
58. Upon a phone call from Defendant’s, Ms. Martinez rushed to the school to find his 14-year-
22
old son drenched in blood. Shocked at the sight of her son’s alarming condition, Ms. Martinez grew
23
highly concerned and wondered why her son had been left bleeding heavily for approximately one
24
hour under Defendant DJUHSD’s supervision. Notably, Ms. Martinez had previously signed a consent
25
form permitting Defendant DJUHSD to make the decision to allow Plaintiff to go inside an ambulance
26
without her consent in emergency situations. Despite these directives, Defendant DJUHSD and DOES
27
1 through 100, failed to promptly transport Plaintiff DAVILA to the hospital for medical care,
28
exacerbating his injuries.
10
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 59. Plaintiff was then taken to the hospital.
2
60. Upon arrival to the hospital, Plaintiff had suffered such significant blood loss that as a
3
precaution, the hospital staff asked Ms. Martinez to sign a blood transfusion consent form.
4
61. Once the hospital staff removed the temporary gauze from Plaintiff’s fingertips, blood
5
immediately began squirting all over. Plaintiff DAVILA needed reconstruction surgery because it
6
chipped bones on the tips of index and middle finger. Plaintiff DAVILA’s third finger needed special
7
glue to seal the skin. The hospital wrapped Plaintiff DAVILA’s hand, gave him pain medication, and
8
sent him to Visalia to go see a surgeon. Plaintiff DAVILA was made to wait 4-5 days and then had
9
surgery at the hospital in Visalia.
10
11 62. Defendants conduct constituted a total lack of supervision and ineffective supervision of
12 Plaintiff DAVILA constituting a lack of ordinary care on the part of those responsible at the school
13 for his supervision, making Defendants vicariously liable for the injuries proximately caused by their
14 negligence.
15 63. As a result of Defendant’s negligent supervision, Plaintiff suffered from severe and debilitating
16 injuries to his fingers which required emergency medical treatment and surgeries, and suffered from
17 severe emotional distress, and pain and suffering.
18 64. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Martinez asked the Vice Principle for a statement regarding the
19 incident, he stated that he would provide the statement on the following day, once he spoke with the
20
other students. However, the Vice Principle later stated that he would not share the students’
21
statements.
22
65. Shortly after the incident, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher called Ms. Martinez and profusely
23
apologized for the incident. The teacher also explained that he was in fact not a woodshop teacher but
24
a business teacher who had been offered the opportunity to teach woodshop. He further explained that
25
he was not even aware that Plaintiff was on the Individualized Education Plan or had autism, and had
26
not been monitoring Plaintiff DAVILA at the time of the accident.
27
28
11
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 66. Since the incident, Plaintiff has not gone to school. Even though the school has contacted Ms.
2
Martinez asking about her son’s attendance, her son has stayed home and she has done everything to
3
protect her son’s health and safety since he is now in need of further care and treatment.
4
67. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, are responsible
5
for these incidents as they had been expressly made aware of the dangerous nature of the woodshop
6
class, had enrolled Plaintiff in the class without notifying his mother in violation of the IEP and school
7
policy, failed to provide safe equipment to Plaintiff and the training and supervision to successfully
8
use the machine without injury, and failed to take any remedial measures.
9
68. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff was physically harmed, traumatized, lost a
10
11 significant amount of blood, requiring surgeries and therapy, and has incurred months of pain and
12 suffering, and will continue to suffer in the future.
13 69. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, negligently and
14 carelessly failed to use ordinary care in the discharge of their duties to supervise students to prevent
15 them from harming other students in that there was no adequate supervision.
16 70. As a direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100,
17 Plaintiff was rendered and/or may be rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and/or disordered, both
18 internally and externally, and/or suffered and/or may suffer, among other things, numerous internal
19 injuries, severe fright, shock, pain, discomfort, and/or anxiety.
20
71. As a further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100,
21
Plaintiff has been forced and/or will be forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and/or
22
laboratory costs during the period of Plaintiff’s disability, and is informed and believes, and thereon
23
alleges, he may be and/or will in the future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same nature,
24
all in an amount which is at present unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show the exact
25
amount of said expenses at the time of trial.
26
27
28
12
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 72. Prior to the occurrence of the incidents, Plaintiff was an able-bodied individual, but since said
2
incidents has been fully and/or partially incapacitated, all to Plaintiff’s damage in an amount which is
3
at present unascertained.
4
73. As a further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through
5
100, Plaintiff has been caused and/or may be caused, and did suffer and/or may suffer, and continues
6
to suffer severe and permanent emotional and/or mental distress and/or anguish, humiliation,
7
embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort, and/or anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said
8
9 injuries is presently unknown to Plaintiff, who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they
10 are ascertained.
11 74. By the aforesaid acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been
12 directly and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 3333 including, but
13 not limited to, loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and related expenses for care and
14 procedures both now and in the future, attorney’s fees, and/or other pecuniary loss not presently
15
ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend when ascertained.
16
75. As a result of the unlawful acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, as
17
alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of said suit as specifically
18
provided in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5.
19
76. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
20
III.
21
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
22
Negligence
23
Against All Defendants & DOES 1 Through 100, Only
24
77. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference each and every paragraph in this Complaint as though
25
duly set forth in full herein.
26
27 78. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, were charged with a general duty of
28 reasonable care under the circumstances, to act in a reasonable a safe manner so as not to cause harm
13
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 to others including, but not limited to a duty to supervise and monitor the Plaintiff while on campus
2
and while using equipment/machinery in the woodshop classroom.
3
79. In doing the acts hereinabove alleged, Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100,
4
breached their duty of care by failing to exercise due care by, among other things, participating in or
5
engaging in the activities and conduct described herein above.
6
80. By their conduct, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100 have ratified and adopted the conduct
7
of all the other Defendants and, as such, are legally responsible therefore.
8
81. The wrongful conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, as set forth above, was the
9
proximate and legal cause of severe and permanent injury to Plaintiff.
10
11 82. At all times herein relevant, employer Defendants had full knowledge of all the details of
12 Plaintiff DAVILA’s special needs and IEP, yet knowingly and intentionally failed and refused to take
13 corrective/remedial action.
14 83. At all relevant times Plaintiff DAVILA was under the supervision of Defendant DJUHSD and
15 DOES 1 through 100, who were required to supervise and regulate Plaintiff DAVILA’s conduct while
16 on campus, including during woodshop class, a school-related and encouraged function involving
17 activities taking place during school hours, where Plaintiff was seriously injured.
18 84. In or around August of 2023, Ms. Martinez met with Defendant DJUHSD, including the Vice
19 Principal to discuss Plaintiff’s Individualized Education Plan (“IEP”). As a result, Defendant DJUHSD
20
and staff agreed to enroll Plaintiff DAVILA in special education classes and keep an eye on him.
21
85. Due to his autism, Plaintiff DAVILA would not raise his hand to ask for help and was non-
22
verbal; however, per the IEP, he was supposed to be under constant supervision while at school.
23
86. In or around August 2023, unbeknownst to Ms. Martinez, Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in
24
a woodshop class. When Ms. Martinez received Plaintiff DAVILA’s schedule, it only identified the
25
names of his teachers but did not identify that Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in woodshop class.
26
87. Notably, when Plaintiff took a woodshop class in the prior year as a freshman, Ms. Martinez
27
was not only informed but also kept in contact with the woodshop teacher. Additionally, that prior
28
year, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher assured Ms. Martinez that he would not be hands-on while in class,
14
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 and in the case that he was ever using equipment, Plaintiff DAVILA would receive extra assistance,
2
direct supervision and monitoring.
3
88. In 2023, Plaintiff’s woodshop class was not taught by a trained woodshop teacher, but rather a
4
business teacher who lacked the requisite skill to instruct and safely monitor the woodshop students,
5
and without the skill or experience to safely supervise and monitor Plaintiff DAVILA’s disabilities.
6
Furthermore, this year, unlike the previous year, Plaintiff’s teacher placed him on a machine by
7
himself without any supervision. The equipment used was dangerously old, rusty, and in poor
8
condition.
9
89. On or around August 30, 2023, when Plaintiff was only 14 years old, and Plaintiff’s woodshop
10
11 teacher left the class leaving Plaintiff DAVILA and the other students unattended. The woodshop
12 teacher was not informed by Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, and did not know
13 Plaintiff DAVILA was diagnosed with autism or needed supervision. The woodshop teacher did not
14 pay attention to Plaintiff DAVILA. Defendant DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, negligently failed
15 to instruct and inform the woodshop teacher of Plaintiff DAVILA’s special needs.
16 90. As a direct result of Defendant’s failure to supervise and negligent supervision, Plaintiff had
17 access to and used a dangerous table saw on his own, without the appropriate safeguards, in violation
18 of his IEP requirements, resulting in his lacerating three of his fingertips, taking off the top of his
19 finger bones.
20
91. Upon a phone call from Defendant’s, Ms. Martinez rushed to the school to find his 14-year-
21
old son drenched in blood. Shocked at the sight of her son’s alarming condition, Ms. Martinez grew
22
highly concerned and wondered why her son had been left bleeding heavily for approximately one
23
hour under Defendant DJUHSD’s supervision. Notably, Ms. Martinez had previously signed a consent
24
form permitting Defendant DJUHSD to make the decision to allow Plaintiff to go inside an ambulance
25
without her consent in emergency situations. Despite these directives, Defendant DJUHSD and DOES
26
1 through 100, failed to promptly transport Plaintiff DAVILA to the hospital for medical care,
27
exacerbating his injuries.
28
92. Plaintiff was then taken to the hospital.
15
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 93. Upon arrival to the hospital, Plaintiff had suffered such significant blood loss that as a
2
precaution, the hospital staff asked Ms. Martinez to sign a blood transfusion consent form.
3
94. Once the hospital staff removed the temporary gauze from Plaintiff’s fingertips, blood
4
immediately began squirting all over. Plaintiff DAVILA needed reconstruction surgery because it
5
chipped bones on the tips of index and middle finger. Plaintiff DAVILA’s third finger needed special
6
glue to seal the skin. The hospital wrapped Plaintiff DAVILA’s hand, gave him pain medication, and
7
sent him to Visalia to go see a surgeon. Plaintiff DAVILA was made to wait 4-5 days and then had
8
surgery at the hospital in Visalia.
9
95. Defendants conduct constituted a total lack of supervision and ineffective supervision of
10
11 Plaintiff DAVILA constituting a lack of ordinary care on the part of those responsible at the school
12 for his supervision, making Defendants vicariously liable for the injuries proximately caused by their
13 negligence.
14 96. As a result of Defendant’s negligent supervision, Plaintiff suffered from severe and debilitating
15 injuries to his fingers which required emergency medical treatment and surgeries, and suffered from
16 severe emotional distress, and pain and suffering.
17 97. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Martinez asked the Vice Principle for a statement regarding the
18 incident, he stated that he would provide the statement on the following day, once he spoke with the
19 other students. However, the Vice Principle later stated that he would not share the students’
20
statements.
21
98. Shortly after the incident, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher called Ms. Martinez and profusely
22
apologized for the incident. The teacher also explained that he was in fact not a woodshop teacher but
23
a business teacher who had been offered the opportunity to teach woodshop. He further explained that
24
he was not even aware that Plaintiff was on the Individualized Education Plan or had autism, and had
25
not been monitoring Plaintiff DAVILA at the time of the accident.
26
99. Since the incident, Plaintiff has not gone to school. Even though the school has contacted Ms.
27
Martinez asking about her son’s attendance, her son has stayed home and she has done everything to
28
protect her son’s health and safety since he is now in need of further care and treatment.
16
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 100. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, are responsible
2
for these incidents as they had been expressly made aware of the dangerous nature of the woodshop
3
class, had enrolled Plaintiff in the class without notifying his mother in violation of the IEP and school
4
policy, failed to provide safe equipment to Plaintiff and the training and supervision to successfully
5
use the machine without injury, and failed to take any remedial measures.
6
7 101. Pursuant to California Government Code §§ 900 et seq., Plaintiff filed a tort claim on or about
8 December 13, 2023, which was rejected by Defendant DJUHSD on or about January 16, 2024.
9 Attached, hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibits “A” and “B” are said tort claim form and notice
10 of rejection, respectfully.
11 102. As a direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 21 through 100,
12 Plaintiff was rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and disordered, both internally and externally, and
13 suffered, among other things, numerous internal injuries, severe fright, shock, pain, discomfort and
14 anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said injuries are not known to the Plaintiff, who will pray leave
15 of court to insert the same when they are ascertained. Plaintiff does not at this time know the exact
16
duration or permanence of said injuries, but is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that some
17
of the said injuries are reasonably certain to be permanent in character.
18
103. As a further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 21 through 100,
19
Plaintiff has been forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and laboratory costs during the
20
period of Plaintiff’s disability, and is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that she will in the
21
future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same nature, all in an amount which is at present
22
unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show the exact amount of said expenses at the time of
23
trial.
24
25 104. As a further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES
26 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been caused, and did suffer, and continues to suffer severe and permanent
27 emotional and mental distress and anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain,
28
17
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 discomfort and anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said injuries is presently unknown to Plaintiff,
2
who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they are ascertained.
3
105. By the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been directly
4
and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3333 including, but
5
not limited to, loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and related expenses for care and
6
procedures both now and in the future, attorneys’ fees, and other pecuniary loss not presently
7
ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend when ascertained.
8
106. As a result of the unlawful acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, as
9
alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of said suit as specifically
10
11 provided in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5.
12 107. Plaintiff has been generally damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this court.
13 WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF ABEL DAVILA JR., prays for judgment against the Defendants, and
14 each of them, as follows:
15 1. For general damages in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court;
16 2. For special damages in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court;
17 3. For medical expenses and related items of expense, according to proof;
18 4. For consequential and incidental damages according to proof;
19 5. For prejudgment interest according to proof;
20 6. For declaratory relief;
21 7. For injunctive relief;
22 8. For punitive and exemplary damages as provided for by Cal. Civil Code § 3294;
23 9. For damages, penalties and costs of suit as provided for by California Civil Code § 3333;
24 10. For damages, penalties and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit against Defendants as
25 provided for by California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5, according to proof;
26 11. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
27 ///
28 ///
18
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Dated: April 18, 2024 REISNER & KING LLP
2
By: _/s/Lilit Demirtchian___________
3 LILIT DEMIRTCHIAN
Attorneys for Plaintiff Abel Davila Jr., through
4
his Guardian Ad Litem Maite Martinez
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
EXHIBIT A
DocuSign Envelope ID: D3EA6973-7F28-4082-9287-21DBF983ACF7
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
TO PERSON OR PROPERTY
INSTRUCTIONS:
l. Claims for death, injury to person or personal property must be filed not later than 6 months
after the occurrence. (Govt. Code Sec. 911.2)
2. Claims for damage to all other property must be filed not later than 1 year after the
occurrence.
3. Attach separate sheets, if necessary, and sign each sheet.
4. Claim must be filed with the School District (Govt. Code 915a).
To: (Name of School District)
The Delano Joint Union High School District, Robert F. Kennedy High School
Name of Claimant and age, including name of parent or guardian if required:
Abel Davila, Jr., age 15, Maite Martinez parent and Guardian ad litem
Address of Claimant:1929 Belmont St Delano, California 93215 c/o Reisner & King LLP, 15303 Ventura
Blvd., Suite 1260, Sherman Oaks, California 91403
Telephone Number: 661-474-1596
Address where notices are to be sent: Reisner & King LLP, 15303 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1260, Sherman Oaks,
California 91403
When did injury or damage occur? Give full particulars, date & time of day:
August 30, 2023, during Woodshop class at Robert F. Kennedy High School in Delano, California; Negligent
supervision, negligence, failure to perform mandatory duty Edu Code s 44807 & Govt Code 815.6
Where did injury or damage occur? Describe fully and provide diagram where appropriate, give
street name and address and measurements from landmarks. (Use second page if necessary):
In Woodshop class at Robert F. Kennedy High School in Delano, California located at 1401 Hiett Ave, Delano,
Ca 93215
How did injury or damage occur? Give full particulars (Use second page if necessary):
15 year old student Abel is diagnosed with autism, was placed in woodshop class without parent knowledge, was
left unsupervised in violation of his IEP requirements, was allowed to use a dangerous saw, in a dangerous and
defective state, without supervision, the teacher without requisite skill or experience, without appropriate
safeguards, resulting in Abel cutting three fingers and hand, requiring emergency medical treatment and multiple
surgeries and severe emotional distress, and pain and suffering.
What particular act or omission do you claim caused the injury or damage? Give names of
school district employees causing injury or damage, if known: negligence, negligent supervision,15
year old student Abel is diagnosed with autism, was placed in woodshop class without parent knowledge, was left
unsupervised in violation of his IEP requirements, was allowed to use a dangerous saw, in a dangerous and
defective state, without supervision, the teacher without requisite skill or experience, without appropriate
safeguards, resulting in Abel cutting three fingers and hand, requiring emergency medical treatment and multiple
su
Preview
1 ADAM REISNER, ESQ., (State Bar No. 204351) TESSA KING, ESQ., (State Bar No. 251408) 2 LILIT DEMIRTCHIAN, ESQ., (State Bar No. 351437) REISNER & KING LLP 3 15303Ventura Blvd., Suite 1260 4 Sherman Oaks, California 91403 Phone: (818) 981-0901 5 Fax: (818) 981-0902 6 Attorneys for PLAINTIFF MAITE MARTINEZ, as guardian ad litem for ABEL DAVILA JR. 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN 10 ) Case No.: 11 MAITE MARTINEZ, as guardian ad litem for ) ) 12 ABEL DAVILA JR., ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: ) 13 Plaintiff, ) (1) NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION; ) 14 ) (2) VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA vs. ) EDUCATION CODE §44807; 15 ) DELANO JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL ) (3) NEGLIGENCE 16 DISTRICT; ) ROBERT F. KENNEDY HIGH SCHOOL, ) 17 ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED and DOES 1 THROUGH 100, inclusive. ) 18 ) Defendants. ) 19 ) ) 20 ) ) 21 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 COMES NOW PLAINTIFF ABEL DAVILA JR., (hereinafter referred to as “DAVILA.” or 26 “Plaintiff”),” by and through his Guardian ad Litem, MAITE MARTINEZ (hereinafter referred to as 27 “Ms. Martinez”) complains against the above-named Defendants and for causes of action against the 28 Defendants, and each of them, as follows: 1 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 I. 2 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 3 Negligent Supervision 4 [California Education Code § 44807] 5 Against All Defendants & DOES 21 Through 100, Inclusive 6 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the claims alleged herein. The relief requested is within the 7 jurisdiction of this Court. 8 2. Venue is proper in the County Kern as Defendants conduct business in Kern County and the 9 claims alleged herein arose in the County of Kern. 10 3. At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff DAVILA was, and now is, an individual domiciled and 11 residing in the Delano, County of Kern, State of California. 12 4. At all times mentioned herein, Maite Martinez was, and now is, an individual domiciled and 13 residing in the County of Kern, State of California, and is, and at all times relevant herein was, the 14 15 mother and guardian of DAVILA. 16 5. Plaintiff DAVILA is a minor male, age 15, born September 25, 2008, and his mother, Ms. 17 Maite Martinez, is Guardian Ad Litem of Plaintiff DAVILA, to prosecute Plaintiff DAVILA’s claims. 18 6. At all times mentioned herein, Robert F. Kennedy High School is, and at all relevant times 19 was, a school operated by, and under the management and control of, The Delano Joint Union High 20 School District, its governing board, officers, and employees. Robert F. Kennedy High School is 21 located at 1401 Hiett Ave, County of Kern, State of California. 22 7. At all times mentioned, defendants DELANO JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 23 and ROBERT F. KENNEDY HIGH SCHOOL (hereinafter referred to as “DJUHSD”) is, and at all 24 relevant times was, a public entity provided instruction for students, organized and existing under the 25 laws of the State of California. 26 8. At all times mentioned herein, DJUHSD and DOES 1 through 100, is, and at all relevant times 27 herein was, responsible for management, supervision, and control of the students, in accordance with 28 state and local laws. 2 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 9. At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff is, and at all relevant times was, enrolled as a student 2 Robert F. Kennedy High School, and is, and at all relevant times was, a resident of Kern County, State 3 of California. 4 10. At all times mentioned herein, Defendant Teacher DOE (hereinafter referred to as and 5 collectively with all other Defendants as “Defendants”), was, and now is, an individual residing in the 6 County of Kern, State of California, and was an Agent, Principal, and/or Employee of Defendant 7 DJUHSD and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them. 8 11. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities, whether corporate, associate, individual, 9 or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and therefore sues said 10 11 Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave of Court to amend this Complaint to 12 assert the true names and capacities of the fictitiously named Defendants when the same have been 13 ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each Defendant designated as 14 “DOES” herein is legally responsible for the events, happenings, acts, occurrences, indebtedness, 15 damages and liabilities hereinafter alleged and caused injuries and damages proximately thereby to 16 the Plaintiff, as hereinafter alleged. 17 12. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendant DOES 1 through 100, and 18 therefore sues these defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this complaint to state 19 the true names of defendants DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, when they have been ascertained. 20 Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each Defendant so named is responsible in 21 some manner for the injuries and damages suffered by Plaintiff as set forth. 22 13. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the Defendants named herein 23 has, at all times relevant to this action, been the officer, agent, employee and/or representative of the 24 remaining Defendants and has acted within the course and scope of such agency and employment, and 25 with the permission and consent of the co-defendants. 26 14. Pursuant to California Government Code §§ 900 et seq., Plaintiff filed a tort claim on or about 27 December 13, 2023, which was rejected by Defendant DJUHSD on or about January 16, 2024. 28 3 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 Attached, hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibits “A” and “B” are said tort claim form and notice 2 of rejection, respectfully. 3 15. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, had a duty at all 4 times to supervise the conduct of students on the grounds of Robert F. Kennedy High School, and to 5 enforce the regulations necessary for the students’ protection, and to exercise ordinary care to prevent 6 physical injury to said students, and to provide safe and supervised equipment for them to use, and to 7 comply with the Individualized Education Plan for Plaintiff DAVILA, as codified under California 8 Education Code §44807 and otherwise. 9 16. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, failed to 10 11 reasonable supervise Plaintiff DAVILA, resulting in Plaintiff DAVILA suffering harm that was 12 foreseeable by the school and school officials; and Plaintiff DAVILA suffered actual quantifiable harm 13 due to the negligent supervision of the school and school officials. 14 17. Plaintiff was diagnosed with autism at the age of 3 and has since struggled asking for help. 15 Furthermore, Plaintiff struggled with bullying in both middle and high school. He did not know much 16 information about himself or his mother. 17 18. Plaintiff was bullied on campus, and he was often chased around the school by a student. Even 18 though they informed Defendant DJUHSD about the bullying and the Defendant DJUHSD had 19 security walking around campus, they claimed to never see anything. 20 19. In or around August of 2023, Ms. Martinez met with Defendant DJUHSD, including the Vice 21 Principal to discuss Plaintiff’s Individualized Education Plan (“IEP”). As a result, Defendant DJUHSD 22 and staff agreed to enroll Plaintiff DAVILA in special education classes and keep an eye on him. 23 20. Due to his autism, Plaintiff DAVILA would not raise his hand to ask for help and was non- 24 verbal; however, per the IEP, he was supposed to be under constant supervision while at school. 25 21. In or around August 2023, unbeknownst to Ms. Martinez, Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in 26 a woodshop class. When Ms. Martinez received Plaintiff DAVILA’s schedule, it only identified the 27 names of his teachers but did not identify that Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in woodshop class. 28 4 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 22. Notably, when Plaintiff took a woodshop class in the prior year as a freshman, Ms. Martinez 2 was not only informed but also kept in contact with the woodshop teacher. Additionally, that prior 3 year, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher assured Ms. Martinez that he would not be hands-on while in class, 4 and in the case that he was ever using equipment, Plaintiff DAVILA would receive extra assistance, 5 direct supervision and monitoring. 6 23. In 2023, Plaintiff’s woodshop class was not taught by a trained woodshop teacher, but rather a 7 business teacher who lacked the requisite skill to instruct and safely monitor the woodshop students, 8 and without the skill or experience to safely supervise and monitor Plaintiff DAVILA’s disabilities. 9 Furthermore, this year, unlike the previous year, Plaintiff’s teacher placed him on a machine by 10 11 himself without any supervision. The equipment used was dangerously old, rusty, and in poor 12 condition. 13 24. On or around August 30, 2023, when Plaintiff was only 14 years old, and Plaintiff’s woodshop 14 teacher left the class leaving Plaintiff DAVILA and the other students unattended. The woodshop 15 teacher was not informed by Defendant DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, and did not know 16 Plaintiff DAVILA was diagnosed with autism or needed supervision. The woodshop teacher did not 17 pay attention to Plaintiff DAVILA. Defendant DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, negligently failed 18 to instruct and inform the woodshop teacher of Plaintiff DAVILA’s special needs. 19 25. As a direct result of Defendant’s failure to supervise and negligent supervision, Plaintiff had 20 access to and used a dangerous table saw on his own, without the appropriate safeguards, in violation 21 of his IEP requirements, resulting in his lacerating three of his fingertips, taking off the top of his 22 finger bones. 23 26. Upon a phone call from Defendant’s, Ms. Martinez rushed to the school to find his 14-year- 24 old son drenched in blood. Shocked at the sight of her son’s alarming condition, Ms. Martinez grew 25 highly concerned and wondered why her son had been left bleeding heavily for approximately one 26 hour under Defendant DJUHSD’s supervision. Notably, Ms. Martinez had previously signed a consent 27 form permitting Defendant DJUHSD to make the decision to allow Plaintiff to go inside an ambulance 28 without her consent in emergency situations. Despite these directives, Defendants DJUHSD and 5 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 DOES 1 through 100, failed to promptly transport Plaintiff DAVILA to the hospital for medical care, 2 exacerbating his injuries. 3 27. Plaintiff was then taken to the hospital. 4 28. Upon arrival to the hospital, Plaintiff had suffered such significant blood loss that as a 5 precaution, the hospital staff asked Ms. Martinez to sign a blood transfusion consent form. 6 29. Once the hospital staff removed the temporary gauze from Plaintiff’s fingertips, blood 7 immediately began squirting all over. Plaintiff DAVILA needed reconstruction surgery because it 8 chipped bones on the tips of index and middle finger. Plaintiff DAVILA’s third finger needed special 9 glue to seal the skin. The hospital wrapped Plaintiff DAVILA’s hand, gave him pain medication, and 10 11 sent him to Visalia to go see a surgeon. Plaintiff DAVILA was made to wait 4-5 days and then had 12 surgery at the hospital in Visalia. 13 30. As a result of Defendant’s negligent supervision, Plaintiff suffered from severe and debilitating 14 injuries to his fingers which required emergency medical treatment and surgeries, and suffered from 15 severe emotional distress, and pain and suffering. 16 31. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Martinez asked the Vice Principle for a statement regarding the 17 incident, he stated that he would provide the statement on the following day, once he spoke with the 18 other students. However, the Vice Principle later stated that he would not share the students’ 19 statements. 20 32. Shortly after the incident, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher called Ms. Martinez and profusely 21 apologized for the incident. The teacher also explained that he was in fact not a woodshop teacher but 22 a business teacher who had been offered the opportunity to teach woodshop. He further explained that 23 he was not even aware that Plaintiff was on the Individualized Education Plan or had autism, and had 24 not been monitoring Plaintiff DAVILA at the time of the accident. 25 33. Since the incident, Plaintiff has not gone to school. Even though the school has contacted Ms. 26 Martinez asking about her son’s attendance, her son has stayed home and she has done everything to 27 protect her son’s health and safety since he is now in need of further care and treatment. 28 6 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 34. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, are responsible 2 for these incidents as they had been expressly made aware of the dangerous nature of the woodshop 3 class, had enrolled Plaintiff in the class without notifying his mother in violation of the IEP and school 4 policy, failed to provide safe equipment to Plaintiff and the training and supervision to successfully 5 use the machine without injury, and failed to take any remedial measures. 6 35. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff was physically harmed, traumatized, lost a 7 significant amount of blood, requiring surgeries and therapy, and has incurred months of pain and 8 suffering, and will continue to suffer in the future. 9 36. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, negligently and 10 11 carelessly failed to use ordinary care in the discharge of their duties to supervise students to prevent 12 them from harming other students in that there was no adequate supervision. 13 37. As a direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, 14 Plaintiff was rendered and/or may be rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and/or disordered, both 15 internally and externally, and/or suffered and/or may suffer, among other things, numerous internal 16 injuries, severe fright, shock, pain, discomfort, and/or anxiety. 17 38. As a further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, 18 Plaintiff has been forced and/or will be forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and/or 19 laboratory costs during the period of Plaintiff’s disability, and is informed and believes, and thereon 20 alleges, he may be and/or will in the future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same nature, 21 all in an amount which is at present unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show the exact 22 amount of said expenses at the time of trial. 23 39. Prior to the occurrence of the incidents, Plaintiff was an able-bodied individual, but since said 24 incidents has been fully and/or partially incapacitated, all to Plaintiff’s damage in an amount which is 25 at present unascertained. 26 40. As a further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 27 100, Plaintiff has been caused and/or may be caused, and did suffer and/or may suffer, and continues 28 to suffer severe and permanent emotional and/or mental distress and/or anguish, humiliation, 7 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort, and/or anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said 2 injuries is presently unknown to Plaintiff, who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they 3 are ascertained. 4 41. By the aforesaid acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been 5 directly and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 3333 including, but 6 not limited to, potential loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and related expenses for 7 care and procedures both now and in the future, attorney’s fees, and/or other pecuniary loss not 8 presently ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend when ascertained. 9 42. As a result of the harassing acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, as alleged herein, 10 11 Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of said suit as specifically provided in 12 California 1021.5. 13 43. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. 14 II. 15 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 16 Violation of California Education Code § 44807 17 Against All Defendants & DOES 1 through 100, Inclusive 18 44. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference each and every paragraph in this Complaint as though 19 duly set forth in full herein. 20 45. At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff belonged to the class of persons whom those laws were 21 designed to protect. The harm which has befallen Plaintiff is of a type the state and local laws were 22 designed to prevent. 23 46. California Education Code § 44807 imposes upon public school districts a mandatory duty to 24 supervise pupils while on school grounds: “Every teacher in the public schools shall hold pupils to a 25 strict account for their conduct on the way to and from school, on the playgrounds, or during recess.” 26 Either a total lack of supervision or ineffective supervision may constitute a lack of care on the part of 27 those responsible for student supervision. 28 8 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 47. California Education Code § 44807 imposes on school authorities a general duty to supervise 2 pupils on school property during school hours in order to “ ‘regulate their conduct so as to prevent 3 disorderly and dangerous practices which are likely to result in physical injury to immature scholars 4 under their custody.’ ” 5 48. Under California Government Code § 815.6, a school district is civilly liable for injuries 6 proximately caused by such lack of care: “Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed 7 by an enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the public 8 entity is liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to discharge the duty.” 9 49. Under California Government Code § 815.6, Defendants DJUHSD and DOES 1 through 100, 10 11 and each of them, were under a mandatory duty to supervise at all times the conduct of students on the 12 school grounds and to enforce those rules and regulations for their protection. The acts and omissions 13 of Defendants, and each of them, as alleged herein, violated State and local laws, inter alia, California 14 Education Code § 44807. 15 50. At all relevant times Plaintiff DAVILA was under the supervision of Defendant DJUHSD and 16 DOES 1 through 100, who were required to supervise and regulate Plaintiff DAVILA’s conduct while 17 on campus, including during woodshop class, a school-related and encouraged function involving 18 activities taking place during school hours, where Plaintiff was seriously injured. 19 51. In or around August of 2023, Ms. Martinez met with Defendant DJUHSD, including the Vice 20 Principal to discuss Plaintiff’s Individualized Education Plan (“IEP”). As a result, Defendant DJUHSD 21 and staff agreed to enroll Plaintiff DAVILA in special education classes and keep an eye on him. 22 52. Due to his autism, Plaintiff DAVILA would not raise his hand to ask for help and was non- 23 verbal; however, per the IEP, he was supposed to be under constant supervision while at school. 24 53. In or around August 2023, unbeknownst to Ms. Martinez, Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in 25 a woodshop class. When Ms. Martinez received Plaintiff DAVILA’s schedule, it only identified the 26 names of his teachers but did not identify that Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in woodshop class. 27 54. Notably, when Plaintiff took a woodshop class in the prior year as a freshman, Ms. Martinez 28 was not only informed but also kept in contact with the woodshop teacher. Additionally, that prior 9 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 year, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher assured Ms. Martinez that he would not be hands-on while in class, 2 and in the case that he was ever using equipment, Plaintiff DAVILA would receive extra assistance, 3 direct supervision and monitoring. 4 55. In 2023, Plaintiff’s woodshop class was not taught by a trained woodshop teacher, but rather a 5 business teacher who lacked the requisite skill to instruct and safely monitor the woodshop students, 6 and without the skill or experience to safely supervise and monitor Plaintiff DAVILA’s disabilities. 7 Furthermore, this year, unlike the previous year, Plaintiff’s teacher placed him on a machine by 8 himself without any supervision. The equipment used was dangerously old, rusty, and in poor 9 condition. 10 11 56. On or around August 30, 2023, when Plaintiff was only 14 years old, and Plaintiff’s woodshop 12 teacher left the class leaving Plaintiff DAVILA and the other students unattended. The woodshop 13 teacher was not informed by Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, and did not know 14 Plaintiff DAVILA was diagnosed with autism or needed supervision. The woodshop teacher did not 15 pay attention to Plaintiff DAVILA. Defendant DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, negligently failed 16 to instruct and inform the woodshop teacher of Plaintiff DAVILA’s special needs. 17 57. As a direct result of Defendant’s failure to supervise and negligent supervision, Plaintiff had 18 access to and used a dangerous table saw on his own, without the appropriate safeguards, in violation 19 of his IEP requirements, resulting in his lacerating three of his fingertips, taking off the top of his 20 finger bones. 21 58. Upon a phone call from Defendant’s, Ms. Martinez rushed to the school to find his 14-year- 22 old son drenched in blood. Shocked at the sight of her son’s alarming condition, Ms. Martinez grew 23 highly concerned and wondered why her son had been left bleeding heavily for approximately one 24 hour under Defendant DJUHSD’s supervision. Notably, Ms. Martinez had previously signed a consent 25 form permitting Defendant DJUHSD to make the decision to allow Plaintiff to go inside an ambulance 26 without her consent in emergency situations. Despite these directives, Defendant DJUHSD and DOES 27 1 through 100, failed to promptly transport Plaintiff DAVILA to the hospital for medical care, 28 exacerbating his injuries. 10 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 59. Plaintiff was then taken to the hospital. 2 60. Upon arrival to the hospital, Plaintiff had suffered such significant blood loss that as a 3 precaution, the hospital staff asked Ms. Martinez to sign a blood transfusion consent form. 4 61. Once the hospital staff removed the temporary gauze from Plaintiff’s fingertips, blood 5 immediately began squirting all over. Plaintiff DAVILA needed reconstruction surgery because it 6 chipped bones on the tips of index and middle finger. Plaintiff DAVILA’s third finger needed special 7 glue to seal the skin. The hospital wrapped Plaintiff DAVILA’s hand, gave him pain medication, and 8 sent him to Visalia to go see a surgeon. Plaintiff DAVILA was made to wait 4-5 days and then had 9 surgery at the hospital in Visalia. 10 11 62. Defendants conduct constituted a total lack of supervision and ineffective supervision of 12 Plaintiff DAVILA constituting a lack of ordinary care on the part of those responsible at the school 13 for his supervision, making Defendants vicariously liable for the injuries proximately caused by their 14 negligence. 15 63. As a result of Defendant’s negligent supervision, Plaintiff suffered from severe and debilitating 16 injuries to his fingers which required emergency medical treatment and surgeries, and suffered from 17 severe emotional distress, and pain and suffering. 18 64. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Martinez asked the Vice Principle for a statement regarding the 19 incident, he stated that he would provide the statement on the following day, once he spoke with the 20 other students. However, the Vice Principle later stated that he would not share the students’ 21 statements. 22 65. Shortly after the incident, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher called Ms. Martinez and profusely 23 apologized for the incident. The teacher also explained that he was in fact not a woodshop teacher but 24 a business teacher who had been offered the opportunity to teach woodshop. He further explained that 25 he was not even aware that Plaintiff was on the Individualized Education Plan or had autism, and had 26 not been monitoring Plaintiff DAVILA at the time of the accident. 27 28 11 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 66. Since the incident, Plaintiff has not gone to school. Even though the school has contacted Ms. 2 Martinez asking about her son’s attendance, her son has stayed home and she has done everything to 3 protect her son’s health and safety since he is now in need of further care and treatment. 4 67. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, are responsible 5 for these incidents as they had been expressly made aware of the dangerous nature of the woodshop 6 class, had enrolled Plaintiff in the class without notifying his mother in violation of the IEP and school 7 policy, failed to provide safe equipment to Plaintiff and the training and supervision to successfully 8 use the machine without injury, and failed to take any remedial measures. 9 68. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff was physically harmed, traumatized, lost a 10 11 significant amount of blood, requiring surgeries and therapy, and has incurred months of pain and 12 suffering, and will continue to suffer in the future. 13 69. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, negligently and 14 carelessly failed to use ordinary care in the discharge of their duties to supervise students to prevent 15 them from harming other students in that there was no adequate supervision. 16 70. As a direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, 17 Plaintiff was rendered and/or may be rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and/or disordered, both 18 internally and externally, and/or suffered and/or may suffer, among other things, numerous internal 19 injuries, severe fright, shock, pain, discomfort, and/or anxiety. 20 71. As a further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, 21 Plaintiff has been forced and/or will be forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and/or 22 laboratory costs during the period of Plaintiff’s disability, and is informed and believes, and thereon 23 alleges, he may be and/or will in the future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same nature, 24 all in an amount which is at present unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show the exact 25 amount of said expenses at the time of trial. 26 27 28 12 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 72. Prior to the occurrence of the incidents, Plaintiff was an able-bodied individual, but since said 2 incidents has been fully and/or partially incapacitated, all to Plaintiff’s damage in an amount which is 3 at present unascertained. 4 73. As a further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 5 100, Plaintiff has been caused and/or may be caused, and did suffer and/or may suffer, and continues 6 to suffer severe and permanent emotional and/or mental distress and/or anguish, humiliation, 7 embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort, and/or anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said 8 9 injuries is presently unknown to Plaintiff, who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they 10 are ascertained. 11 74. By the aforesaid acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been 12 directly and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 3333 including, but 13 not limited to, loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and related expenses for care and 14 procedures both now and in the future, attorney’s fees, and/or other pecuniary loss not presently 15 ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend when ascertained. 16 75. As a result of the unlawful acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, as 17 alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of said suit as specifically 18 provided in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5. 19 76. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. 20 III. 21 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 22 Negligence 23 Against All Defendants & DOES 1 Through 100, Only 24 77. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference each and every paragraph in this Complaint as though 25 duly set forth in full herein. 26 27 78. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, were charged with a general duty of 28 reasonable care under the circumstances, to act in a reasonable a safe manner so as not to cause harm 13 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 to others including, but not limited to a duty to supervise and monitor the Plaintiff while on campus 2 and while using equipment/machinery in the woodshop classroom. 3 79. In doing the acts hereinabove alleged, Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, 4 breached their duty of care by failing to exercise due care by, among other things, participating in or 5 engaging in the activities and conduct described herein above. 6 80. By their conduct, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100 have ratified and adopted the conduct 7 of all the other Defendants and, as such, are legally responsible therefore. 8 81. The wrongful conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, as set forth above, was the 9 proximate and legal cause of severe and permanent injury to Plaintiff. 10 11 82. At all times herein relevant, employer Defendants had full knowledge of all the details of 12 Plaintiff DAVILA’s special needs and IEP, yet knowingly and intentionally failed and refused to take 13 corrective/remedial action. 14 83. At all relevant times Plaintiff DAVILA was under the supervision of Defendant DJUHSD and 15 DOES 1 through 100, who were required to supervise and regulate Plaintiff DAVILA’s conduct while 16 on campus, including during woodshop class, a school-related and encouraged function involving 17 activities taking place during school hours, where Plaintiff was seriously injured. 18 84. In or around August of 2023, Ms. Martinez met with Defendant DJUHSD, including the Vice 19 Principal to discuss Plaintiff’s Individualized Education Plan (“IEP”). As a result, Defendant DJUHSD 20 and staff agreed to enroll Plaintiff DAVILA in special education classes and keep an eye on him. 21 85. Due to his autism, Plaintiff DAVILA would not raise his hand to ask for help and was non- 22 verbal; however, per the IEP, he was supposed to be under constant supervision while at school. 23 86. In or around August 2023, unbeknownst to Ms. Martinez, Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in 24 a woodshop class. When Ms. Martinez received Plaintiff DAVILA’s schedule, it only identified the 25 names of his teachers but did not identify that Plaintiff DAVILA was enrolled in woodshop class. 26 87. Notably, when Plaintiff took a woodshop class in the prior year as a freshman, Ms. Martinez 27 was not only informed but also kept in contact with the woodshop teacher. Additionally, that prior 28 year, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher assured Ms. Martinez that he would not be hands-on while in class, 14 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 and in the case that he was ever using equipment, Plaintiff DAVILA would receive extra assistance, 2 direct supervision and monitoring. 3 88. In 2023, Plaintiff’s woodshop class was not taught by a trained woodshop teacher, but rather a 4 business teacher who lacked the requisite skill to instruct and safely monitor the woodshop students, 5 and without the skill or experience to safely supervise and monitor Plaintiff DAVILA’s disabilities. 6 Furthermore, this year, unlike the previous year, Plaintiff’s teacher placed him on a machine by 7 himself without any supervision. The equipment used was dangerously old, rusty, and in poor 8 condition. 9 89. On or around August 30, 2023, when Plaintiff was only 14 years old, and Plaintiff’s woodshop 10 11 teacher left the class leaving Plaintiff DAVILA and the other students unattended. The woodshop 12 teacher was not informed by Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, and did not know 13 Plaintiff DAVILA was diagnosed with autism or needed supervision. The woodshop teacher did not 14 pay attention to Plaintiff DAVILA. Defendant DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, negligently failed 15 to instruct and inform the woodshop teacher of Plaintiff DAVILA’s special needs. 16 90. As a direct result of Defendant’s failure to supervise and negligent supervision, Plaintiff had 17 access to and used a dangerous table saw on his own, without the appropriate safeguards, in violation 18 of his IEP requirements, resulting in his lacerating three of his fingertips, taking off the top of his 19 finger bones. 20 91. Upon a phone call from Defendant’s, Ms. Martinez rushed to the school to find his 14-year- 21 old son drenched in blood. Shocked at the sight of her son’s alarming condition, Ms. Martinez grew 22 highly concerned and wondered why her son had been left bleeding heavily for approximately one 23 hour under Defendant DJUHSD’s supervision. Notably, Ms. Martinez had previously signed a consent 24 form permitting Defendant DJUHSD to make the decision to allow Plaintiff to go inside an ambulance 25 without her consent in emergency situations. Despite these directives, Defendant DJUHSD and DOES 26 1 through 100, failed to promptly transport Plaintiff DAVILA to the hospital for medical care, 27 exacerbating his injuries. 28 92. Plaintiff was then taken to the hospital. 15 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 93. Upon arrival to the hospital, Plaintiff had suffered such significant blood loss that as a 2 precaution, the hospital staff asked Ms. Martinez to sign a blood transfusion consent form. 3 94. Once the hospital staff removed the temporary gauze from Plaintiff’s fingertips, blood 4 immediately began squirting all over. Plaintiff DAVILA needed reconstruction surgery because it 5 chipped bones on the tips of index and middle finger. Plaintiff DAVILA’s third finger needed special 6 glue to seal the skin. The hospital wrapped Plaintiff DAVILA’s hand, gave him pain medication, and 7 sent him to Visalia to go see a surgeon. Plaintiff DAVILA was made to wait 4-5 days and then had 8 surgery at the hospital in Visalia. 9 95. Defendants conduct constituted a total lack of supervision and ineffective supervision of 10 11 Plaintiff DAVILA constituting a lack of ordinary care on the part of those responsible at the school 12 for his supervision, making Defendants vicariously liable for the injuries proximately caused by their 13 negligence. 14 96. As a result of Defendant’s negligent supervision, Plaintiff suffered from severe and debilitating 15 injuries to his fingers which required emergency medical treatment and surgeries, and suffered from 16 severe emotional distress, and pain and suffering. 17 97. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Martinez asked the Vice Principle for a statement regarding the 18 incident, he stated that he would provide the statement on the following day, once he spoke with the 19 other students. However, the Vice Principle later stated that he would not share the students’ 20 statements. 21 98. Shortly after the incident, Plaintiff’s woodshop teacher called Ms. Martinez and profusely 22 apologized for the incident. The teacher also explained that he was in fact not a woodshop teacher but 23 a business teacher who had been offered the opportunity to teach woodshop. He further explained that 24 he was not even aware that Plaintiff was on the Individualized Education Plan or had autism, and had 25 not been monitoring Plaintiff DAVILA at the time of the accident. 26 99. Since the incident, Plaintiff has not gone to school. Even though the school has contacted Ms. 27 Martinez asking about her son’s attendance, her son has stayed home and she has done everything to 28 protect her son’s health and safety since he is now in need of further care and treatment. 16 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 100. Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, are responsible 2 for these incidents as they had been expressly made aware of the dangerous nature of the woodshop 3 class, had enrolled Plaintiff in the class without notifying his mother in violation of the IEP and school 4 policy, failed to provide safe equipment to Plaintiff and the training and supervision to successfully 5 use the machine without injury, and failed to take any remedial measures. 6 7 101. Pursuant to California Government Code §§ 900 et seq., Plaintiff filed a tort claim on or about 8 December 13, 2023, which was rejected by Defendant DJUHSD on or about January 16, 2024. 9 Attached, hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibits “A” and “B” are said tort claim form and notice 10 of rejection, respectfully. 11 102. As a direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 21 through 100, 12 Plaintiff was rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and disordered, both internally and externally, and 13 suffered, among other things, numerous internal injuries, severe fright, shock, pain, discomfort and 14 anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said injuries are not known to the Plaintiff, who will pray leave 15 of court to insert the same when they are ascertained. Plaintiff does not at this time know the exact 16 duration or permanence of said injuries, but is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that some 17 of the said injuries are reasonably certain to be permanent in character. 18 103. As a further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 21 through 100, 19 Plaintiff has been forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and laboratory costs during the 20 period of Plaintiff’s disability, and is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that she will in the 21 future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same nature, all in an amount which is at present 22 unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show the exact amount of said expenses at the time of 23 trial. 24 25 104. As a further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants DJUHSD, and DOES 26 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been caused, and did suffer, and continues to suffer severe and permanent 27 emotional and mental distress and anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, 28 17 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 discomfort and anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said injuries is presently unknown to Plaintiff, 2 who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they are ascertained. 3 105. By the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been directly 4 and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3333 including, but 5 not limited to, loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and related expenses for care and 6 procedures both now and in the future, attorneys’ fees, and other pecuniary loss not presently 7 ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend when ascertained. 8 106. As a result of the unlawful acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, as 9 alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of said suit as specifically 10 11 provided in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5. 12 107. Plaintiff has been generally damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this court. 13 WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF ABEL DAVILA JR., prays for judgment against the Defendants, and 14 each of them, as follows: 15 1. For general damages in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court; 16 2. For special damages in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court; 17 3. For medical expenses and related items of expense, according to proof; 18 4. For consequential and incidental damages according to proof; 19 5. For prejudgment interest according to proof; 20 6. For declaratory relief; 21 7. For injunctive relief; 22 8. For punitive and exemplary damages as provided for by Cal. Civil Code § 3294; 23 9. For damages, penalties and costs of suit as provided for by California Civil Code § 3333; 24 10. For damages, penalties and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit against Defendants as 25 provided for by California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5, according to proof; 26 11. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 27 /// 28 /// 18 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 Dated: April 18, 2024 REISNER & KING LLP 2 By: _/s/Lilit Demirtchian___________ 3 LILIT DEMIRTCHIAN Attorneys for Plaintiff Abel Davila Jr., through 4 his Guardian Ad Litem Maite Martinez 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES EXHIBIT A DocuSign Envelope ID: D3EA6973-7F28-4082-9287-21DBF983ACF7 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES TO PERSON OR PROPERTY INSTRUCTIONS: l. Claims for death, injury to person or personal property must be filed not later than 6 months after the occurrence. (Govt. Code Sec. 911.2) 2. Claims for damage to all other property must be filed not later than 1 year after the occurrence. 3. Attach separate sheets, if necessary, and sign each sheet. 4. Claim must be filed with the School District (Govt. Code 915a). To: (Name of School District) The Delano Joint Union High School District, Robert F. Kennedy High School Name of Claimant and age, including name of parent or guardian if required: Abel Davila, Jr., age 15, Maite Martinez parent and Guardian ad litem Address of Claimant:1929 Belmont St Delano, California 93215 c/o Reisner & King LLP, 15303 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1260, Sherman Oaks, California 91403 Telephone Number: 661-474-1596 Address where notices are to be sent: Reisner & King LLP, 15303 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1260, Sherman Oaks, California 91403 When did injury or damage occur? Give full particulars, date & time of day: August 30, 2023, during Woodshop class at Robert F. Kennedy High School in Delano, California; Negligent supervision, negligence, failure to perform mandatory duty Edu Code s 44807 & Govt Code 815.6 Where did injury or damage occur? Describe fully and provide diagram where appropriate, give street name and address and measurements from landmarks. (Use second page if necessary): In Woodshop class at Robert F. Kennedy High School in Delano, California located at 1401 Hiett Ave, Delano, Ca 93215 How did injury or damage occur? Give full particulars (Use second page if necessary): 15 year old student Abel is diagnosed with autism, was placed in woodshop class without parent knowledge, was left unsupervised in violation of his IEP requirements, was allowed to use a dangerous saw, in a dangerous and defective state, without supervision, the teacher without requisite skill or experience, without appropriate safeguards, resulting in Abel cutting three fingers and hand, requiring emergency medical treatment and multiple surgeries and severe emotional distress, and pain and suffering. What particular act or omission do you claim caused the injury or damage? Give names of school district employees causing injury or damage, if known: negligence, negligent supervision,15 year old student Abel is diagnosed with autism, was placed in woodshop class without parent knowledge, was left unsupervised in violation of his IEP requirements, was allowed to use a dangerous saw, in a dangerous and defective state, without supervision, the teacher without requisite skill or experience, without appropriate safeguards, resulting in Abel cutting three fingers and hand, requiring emergency medical treatment and multiple su