Preview
XAVIER BECERRA Exempt from Filing Fees
Attorney General of California Pursuant to Gov. Code§ 6103
2 PETER D. HALLORAN
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
3 State Bar No. 184025
DAVIDS.KIM E-FILED
4 Deputy Attorney General 1/27/2021 12:07 PM
State Bar No. 324531 Superior Court of California
5 1300 I Street, Suite 125 County of Fresno
P.O. Box 944255 By: A. Ramos, Deputy
6 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
Telephone: (916) 210-6097
7 Fax: (916) 324-5567
E-mail: Peter.Halloran@doj.ca.gov
8 Attorneys.for Defendants, California Prison Industry
Authority and Cal/fornia Department of Corrections
9 and Rehabilitation (improperly named as Pleasant
Valley State Prison)
10
11 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
12 COUNTY OF FRESNO
13 CENTRAL DIVISION
14
15 VERONICA CASIDA, Case No. 20CECG00849
16 Plaintiff,
17 v. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
18 DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE
CALIFORNIA PRISON INDUSTRY PARAGRAPHS17THROUGH370F
19 AUTHORITY, PLEASANT VALLEY PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED
STATE PRISON, and DOES I-XX, COMPLAINT
20 inclusive,
Date: June 30, 2020
21 Defendants. Time: 3:30 p.m.
Dept: 502
22 Judge: The Honorable Rosemary T.
McGuire
23 Trial Date: None Set
__________________ Action Filed: March 5, 2020
24
25 INTRODUCTION
26 Paragraphs 17 thrnugh 37 of Plaintiff Veronica Casida's First Amended Complaint
27 ("F AC") against Defendants California Prison Industry Authority ("PIA") and California
28 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"), improperly sued as Pleasant Valley
I
Memorandum of Points and Authorities ISO Defendants' Motion to Strike Paragraphs 17 through 37
of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (20CECG00849)
I State Prison ("PVSP"), 1 contain allegations relevant only to her now-dismissed First Cause of
2 Action. Because those allegations are irrelevant to her remaining claims, Defendants request that
3 the Court strike them from Plaintiffs FAC.
4 LEGAL ARGUMENT
I. PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATIONS PERTAINING ONLY TO HER FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
5
SHOULD BE STRICKEN AS IRRELEVANT BECAUSE SHE VOLUNTARILY DISMISSED
6 HER FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION.
7 Generally, "(a]ny party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file
8 a notice of motion to strike the whole or any party thereof... " (Code Civ. Proc.,§ 435,
9 subd. (b)(l).) Alternatively, the co111i may, "at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems
10 proper[,]" rule on a motion to strike, even if served and filed after the time allowed to respond to
11 a pleading. (Id.,at§ 436, subd. (a); CPF Agency Corp. v. R&S Towing (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th
12 1014, 1020 [agreeing that "the court had authority to rule on [a] motion [to strike] at any time
13 under Code of Civil Procedure section 436" so long as it acts within its discretion in doing so].)
14 The grounds for such a motion "shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from
15 any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice." (Id., at§ 437, subd. (a).)
16 Through a motion to strike, a Court may "[s]trike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter
17 inserted in any pleading." (Id., at§ 436, subd. (a).) An irrelevant matter includes allegations that
18 are "not essential to the statement ofa claim or defense." (Id., at§ 431.10, subds. (b)(l) & (c).)
19 On October I, 2020, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her First Cause of Action against
20 Defendants PIA and CDCR, for retaliation under Labor Code, section 1102.5, from her FAC.
21 Following dismissal, her FAC now contains allegations that are not essential to the statement of
22 any existing claim.
23 Paragraphs 31 through 37 of Plaintiffs FAC state the basis for Plaintiffs claim for
24 retaliation under Labor Code, section 1102.5. (FAC, ,r,r 31-37.) Paragraphs 17 through 30 of
25 Plaintiffs FAC are alleged under the header "Allegations Pertaining to Retaliation," and contain
26 factual assertions exclusively supporting Plaintiffs Labor Code, section 1102.5 whistle blower
27
1
PVSP is not a separate, independent entity. Rather, it is a prison facility operated by
28 CDCR. (See Rouser v. White (E.D. Cal. 2009) 630 F.Supp.2d 1165, 1172-79.)
2
Memorandum of Points and Authorities ISO Defendants' Motion to Strike Paragraphs 17 through 3 7
of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (20CECG00849)
1 retaliation claim. Specifically, these allegations detail Plaintiffs contention that she was
2 terminated because she reported what she perceived to be falsification of inmate milestone
3 credits. (FAC, ~~ 17-30.)
4 None of these allegations relate to any of Ms. Casida's other claims. Plaintiffs Second,
5 Third, Fourth, and Fifth Causes of Action all allege claims under the Fair Employment and
6 Housing Act ("FEHA"). These causes of action are supported by Plaintiffs allegations that she
7 was sexually harassed by two employees (FAC, ~~ 42-49), that she was not allowed to work
8 ove1time (FAC, ~ 55), that she was te1minated for complaining of sexual harassment (FAC, ~ 60),
9 and that PIA failed to take steps to investigate or prevent any of these incidents from occurring.
lO (FAC, ~ 65.) Her allegations in support of her contention that she was terminated because she
11 complained of falsification of milestone credits are not essential to the statement of her FEHA
12 claims. These allegations are therefore i1Televant, and should be stricken.
13 Finally, the Comt should exercise its discretion under Code of Civil Procedure, section 436,
14 in ruling on this motion. Defendants filed an answer to the F AC on September 30, 2020. (Deel.
15 Halloran,~ 6.) Plaintiff filed and served a request for dismissal as to her whistleblower retaliation
16 cause of action on October 1, 2020, leaving only her FEHA claims. (Id.) Because the basis for
17 the motion to strike did not materialize until after Defendants had already filed an answer to the
18 F AC, Defendants could not have filed its motion to strike within the time allotted to respond to
19 Plaintiffs FAC.
20 Ill
21 Ill
22 Ill
23 Ill
24 Ill
25 Ill
26 Ill
27 Ill
28 Ill
3
Memorandum of Points and Authorities ISO Defendants' Motion to Strike Paragraphs 17 through 3 7
of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (20CECG00849)
2 CONCLUSION
3 For the foregoing reasons, Defendants respectfully request that the Court strike Paragraphs
4 17 through 3 7 from the F AC, as referenced in the Notice of Motion .
5 Dated: January 27, 202 1 Respectfully Submitted,
6 XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
7
8
9
PETER D. H A LLORAN
10 Supervising Deputy Attorney General
D AVIDS. KIM
I1 Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendants, California
12 Prison Authority and California
Department ofCorrections and
13 Rehabilitation (improperly named as
Pleasant Valley State Prison)
14
SA2020 IO1294
15 MPAs MTS.docx
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Me morandum of Points and Authoriti es ISO Defenda nts' Motion to Strike Paragraphs 17 through 37
of Pla intiff s First Ame nded Comp laint (20CECG00849)
DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Case Name: Veronica Casida v. CalPIA, et al.
No.: 20CECG00849
I declare:
I am employed in the Office of the Attorney General, which is the office of a member of the
California State Bar, at which member's direction this service is made. I am 18 years of age or
older and not a party to this matter. I am familiar with the business practice at the Office of the
Attorney General for collection and processing of conespondence for mailing with the United
States Postal Service. In accordance with that practice, conespondence placed in the internal
mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General is deposited with the United States
Postal Service with postage thereon fully prepaid that same day in the ordinary course of
business.
On January 27, 2021, I served the attached MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE
PARAGRAPHS 17 THROUGH 37 OF PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
by transmitting a true copy via electronic mail. In addition, I pl aced a true copy thereof enclosed
in a sealed envelope, in the internal mail system of the Office of the Attorney General, addressed
as follows:
Andrew B. Jones
Andrew B. Jones PC
1111 E. Herndon Ave., Suite 109
Fresno, CA 93 720
E-mail Address:
ajones@wagnerjones.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
I declare under penalty of pe1jury under the laws of the State of California and the United States
of America the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on
January 2 7, 2021 at Sacramento, California.
Mariaime Baschiera
Declarant
~~L Signature
SA2020 IO1294
34767861.docx
Preview
XAVIER BECERRA Exempt from Filing Fees Attorney General of California Pursuant to Gov. Code§ 6103 2 PETER D. HALLORAN Supervising Deputy Attorney General 3 State Bar No. 184025 DAVIDS.KIM E-FILED 4 Deputy Attorney General 1/27/2021 12:07 PM State Bar No. 324531 Superior Court of California 5 1300 I Street, Suite 125 County of Fresno P.O. Box 944255 By: A. Ramos, Deputy 6 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 210-6097 7 Fax: (916) 324-5567 E-mail: Peter.Halloran@doj.ca.gov 8 Attorneys.for Defendants, California Prison Industry Authority and Cal/fornia Department of Corrections 9 and Rehabilitation (improperly named as Pleasant Valley State Prison) 10 11 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 12 COUNTY OF FRESNO 13 CENTRAL DIVISION 14 15 VERONICA CASIDA, Case No. 20CECG00849 16 Plaintiff, 17 v. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF 18 DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE CALIFORNIA PRISON INDUSTRY PARAGRAPHS17THROUGH370F 19 AUTHORITY, PLEASANT VALLEY PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED STATE PRISON, and DOES I-XX, COMPLAINT 20 inclusive, Date: June 30, 2020 21 Defendants. Time: 3:30 p.m. Dept: 502 22 Judge: The Honorable Rosemary T. McGuire 23 Trial Date: None Set __________________ Action Filed: March 5, 2020 24 25 INTRODUCTION 26 Paragraphs 17 thrnugh 37 of Plaintiff Veronica Casida's First Amended Complaint 27 ("F AC") against Defendants California Prison Industry Authority ("PIA") and California 28 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"), improperly sued as Pleasant Valley I Memorandum of Points and Authorities ISO Defendants' Motion to Strike Paragraphs 17 through 37 of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (20CECG00849) I State Prison ("PVSP"), 1 contain allegations relevant only to her now-dismissed First Cause of 2 Action. Because those allegations are irrelevant to her remaining claims, Defendants request that 3 the Court strike them from Plaintiffs FAC. 4 LEGAL ARGUMENT I. PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATIONS PERTAINING ONLY TO HER FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 5 SHOULD BE STRICKEN AS IRRELEVANT BECAUSE SHE VOLUNTARILY DISMISSED 6 HER FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION. 7 Generally, "(a]ny party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file 8 a notice of motion to strike the whole or any party thereof... " (Code Civ. Proc.,§ 435, 9 subd. (b)(l).) Alternatively, the co111i may, "at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems 10 proper[,]" rule on a motion to strike, even if served and filed after the time allowed to respond to 11 a pleading. (Id.,at§ 436, subd. (a); CPF Agency Corp. v. R&S Towing (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 12 1014, 1020 [agreeing that "the court had authority to rule on [a] motion [to strike] at any time 13 under Code of Civil Procedure section 436" so long as it acts within its discretion in doing so].) 14 The grounds for such a motion "shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from 15 any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice." (Id., at§ 437, subd. (a).) 16 Through a motion to strike, a Court may "[s]trike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter 17 inserted in any pleading." (Id., at§ 436, subd. (a).) An irrelevant matter includes allegations that 18 are "not essential to the statement ofa claim or defense." (Id., at§ 431.10, subds. (b)(l) & (c).) 19 On October I, 2020, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her First Cause of Action against 20 Defendants PIA and CDCR, for retaliation under Labor Code, section 1102.5, from her FAC. 21 Following dismissal, her FAC now contains allegations that are not essential to the statement of 22 any existing claim. 23 Paragraphs 31 through 37 of Plaintiffs FAC state the basis for Plaintiffs claim for 24 retaliation under Labor Code, section 1102.5. (FAC, ,r,r 31-37.) Paragraphs 17 through 30 of 25 Plaintiffs FAC are alleged under the header "Allegations Pertaining to Retaliation," and contain 26 factual assertions exclusively supporting Plaintiffs Labor Code, section 1102.5 whistle blower 27 1 PVSP is not a separate, independent entity. Rather, it is a prison facility operated by 28 CDCR. (See Rouser v. White (E.D. Cal. 2009) 630 F.Supp.2d 1165, 1172-79.) 2 Memorandum of Points and Authorities ISO Defendants' Motion to Strike Paragraphs 17 through 3 7 of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (20CECG00849) 1 retaliation claim. Specifically, these allegations detail Plaintiffs contention that she was 2 terminated because she reported what she perceived to be falsification of inmate milestone 3 credits. (FAC, ~~ 17-30.) 4 None of these allegations relate to any of Ms. Casida's other claims. Plaintiffs Second, 5 Third, Fourth, and Fifth Causes of Action all allege claims under the Fair Employment and 6 Housing Act ("FEHA"). These causes of action are supported by Plaintiffs allegations that she 7 was sexually harassed by two employees (FAC, ~~ 42-49), that she was not allowed to work 8 ove1time (FAC, ~ 55), that she was te1minated for complaining of sexual harassment (FAC, ~ 60), 9 and that PIA failed to take steps to investigate or prevent any of these incidents from occurring. lO (FAC, ~ 65.) Her allegations in support of her contention that she was terminated because she 11 complained of falsification of milestone credits are not essential to the statement of her FEHA 12 claims. These allegations are therefore i1Televant, and should be stricken. 13 Finally, the Comt should exercise its discretion under Code of Civil Procedure, section 436, 14 in ruling on this motion. Defendants filed an answer to the F AC on September 30, 2020. (Deel. 15 Halloran,~ 6.) Plaintiff filed and served a request for dismissal as to her whistleblower retaliation 16 cause of action on October 1, 2020, leaving only her FEHA claims. (Id.) Because the basis for 17 the motion to strike did not materialize until after Defendants had already filed an answer to the 18 F AC, Defendants could not have filed its motion to strike within the time allotted to respond to 19 Plaintiffs FAC. 20 Ill 21 Ill 22 Ill 23 Ill 24 Ill 25 Ill 26 Ill 27 Ill 28 Ill 3 Memorandum of Points and Authorities ISO Defendants' Motion to Strike Paragraphs 17 through 3 7 of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (20CECG00849) 2 CONCLUSION 3 For the foregoing reasons, Defendants respectfully request that the Court strike Paragraphs 4 17 through 3 7 from the F AC, as referenced in the Notice of Motion . 5 Dated: January 27, 202 1 Respectfully Submitted, 6 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California 7 8 9 PETER D. H A LLORAN 10 Supervising Deputy Attorney General D AVIDS. KIM I1 Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants, California 12 Prison Authority and California Department ofCorrections and 13 Rehabilitation (improperly named as Pleasant Valley State Prison) 14 SA2020 IO1294 15 MPAs MTS.docx 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 Me morandum of Points and Authoriti es ISO Defenda nts' Motion to Strike Paragraphs 17 through 37 of Pla intiff s First Ame nded Comp laint (20CECG00849) DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL Case Name: Veronica Casida v. CalPIA, et al. No.: 20CECG00849 I declare: I am employed in the Office of the Attorney General, which is the office of a member of the California State Bar, at which member's direction this service is made. I am 18 years of age or older and not a party to this matter. I am familiar with the business practice at the Office of the Attorney General for collection and processing of conespondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. In accordance with that practice, conespondence placed in the internal mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General is deposited with the United States Postal Service with postage thereon fully prepaid that same day in the ordinary course of business. On January 27, 2021, I served the attached MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE PARAGRAPHS 17 THROUGH 37 OF PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by transmitting a true copy via electronic mail. In addition, I pl aced a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope, in the internal mail system of the Office of the Attorney General, addressed as follows: Andrew B. Jones Andrew B. Jones PC 1111 E. Herndon Ave., Suite 109 Fresno, CA 93 720 E-mail Address: ajones@wagnerjones.com Attorneys for Plaintiff I declare under penalty of pe1jury under the laws of the State of California and the United States of America the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on January 2 7, 2021 at Sacramento, California. Mariaime Baschiera Declarant ~~L Signature SA2020 IO1294 34767861.docx