No Value: Daphne Beletsis, et al vs Christopher Guevara, et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                1    Law Offices of
                         MATHENY SEARS LINKERT & JAIME LLP
                    2    MATTHEW C. JAIME (SBN                140340)
                         ROBERT W.        SWEETIN (SBN 297130)
                    3    3638 American River Drive
                         Sacramento, California 95864
                    4    Telephone:        (916) 978-3434
                         Facsimile:        (916) 978-3430
                    5    mjaime@mathenysears.com
                         rsweetin@mathenysears.com
                    6
                         Attorneys for Defendant, CHRISTOPHER
                    7    GUEVARA

                    8                                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                                                                 COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ
                    9
         a.
         ...I
         ...I
                   10
         ui
         ~   ~           DAPHNE BELETSIS, individually, and as                      Case No.    19CV03287
        .,~~
         <(wco     11
                         Administrator of the Estate of
       ' oO ~::f         ALEXANDER BELETSIS, and YVONNE                             CHRISTOPHER GUEVARA'S
      U.1-a:::Z
      o  Q:wa:::   12
      en w>O             RAINEY, surviving parent of                                MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
      ~  ~ ~~      13    ALEXANDER BELETSIS, deceased,
      -tt                                                                           AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
         -zz~
      o..Jo
           ~(.).
                                                                                    MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,
      s (/)a= f2   14
      ::jQ: Wz                                                                      OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY
         <( ~w                                  Plaintiffs,
         w~~
                                                                                    ADJUDICATION
        Cl)~~
         >- 0            Chapter of Theta Chi Fraternity; DEREK
      ~  ~a::!:!:        KING, individually, and as an
      -  Zz~       13
      u..- <((.)
      u.. _,Ju           agent/member of Theta Chi Fraternity, Inc.
      0(/)-O
      ~o::ffi1-    14    and Theta Iota Chapter of Theta Chi
      ::i<(:l:z          Fraternity; JOHN DYLAN LEITCH,
         w <(~
        Cl)~ ci    15    individually, and as an agent/member of
         >
         z  c.ou
           C")<(         Theta Chi Fraternity, Inc.      and Theta Iota
         w   en          Chapter of Theta Chi Fraternity; QUINN
         :r:
         .,_       16
         <               MCLAUGHLIN, individually and as
        :i:        17    Trustee of the QUINN M.         MCLAUGHLIN
                         LIVING TRUST,         117 Pasture Rd.,     Santa
                   18    Cruz, CA95060; and JOHN DOES                1
                         through   10, inclusive, individually, and as
                   19    agents/members of Theta Chi Fraternity,
                         Inc. and Theta Iota Chapter of Theta Chi
                   20    Fraternity;
                                                Defendants.
                   21

                   22                                                   I. INTRODUCTION

                   23              On the evening of June 2, 2018, Alex Beletsis ("Beletsis") fell            from a second story window

                   24     in Santa Cruz,    California.    Tragically,   Beletsis died    days   later from   his injuries.  Beletsis'  family

                   25     seeks   wrongful    death   damages     from   various   defendants    associated    with  the  fraternity  Beletsis

                   26     belonged to, including its President Christopher Guevara.             ("Guevara")

                   27              While   Beletsis death    is a tragedy,   the  fact that  such  a tragedy   occur does    not equate    with

                   28     Guevara owing any       duty   of care to protect Beletsis simply because Guevara was the local ·chapter
                                                                                      1
                                  CHRISTOPHER GUEVARA'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
                                  MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,               OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
                    1     president of the fraternity that Beletsis was a full member. Further, the fact that Guevara resided at

                    2     the house where Beletsis fell out of the window does not equate to "social host" liability as Guevara

                    3     did not furnish Beletsis with alcohol in any manner.           As such, Guevara requests that the Court grant

                    4     summary judgement in Guevara's favor,             or, alternatively,   summary adjudication on the         issues  set

                    5     forth herein.

                    6                                             II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

                    7              On the evening of June 2, 2018, Alex Beletsis fell out a second-story bathroom window of

                    8     a residence in    Santa Cruz onto the ground below.          (SSUMF #1.)      Beletsis tragically   died days later

                    9     at the  age  of 20  years   old. (SSUMF      #2.)   At the  time   of his  death.  Beletsis   was  a  student  at the
        a.
        ...I
        ...I
                   10     University    of California,   Santa Cruz.    (SSUMF #3.)        At  the time   of his death.   Beletsis  was   a full
         w
        :e   'O
      tPt::= a::!:!:
      - Zz~        13     to drink or consume drugs.       (SSUMF #6.)
      u..
        -      11
        ca~~              to Prevent Harm; (Survival and Wrongful Death); the Sixth Cause of Action, Social Host Liability
         I- 0:: z
      Li..
      Oa::wo::     12
      cn W >0
      ~  ~o::~            for Provision of Alcohol to Person Under 21           years of age.   (SSUMF #26.)
      - Zzci_
      Li..-<((.)
                   13
      u....J (.)
      0 cn-6
      ~a::ffi1-    14                                               III. LEGAL DISCUSSION
      -
        z  (0 (.)
          C'? <(
        w    (/')
                                   A defendant     is entitled to  summary judgment where           the record   establishes   as  a matter of
        :c
        I-
                   16
        <(
        ::E        17     law that the cause of action asserted against it cannot prevail.            (County of Los Angeles v.       Security

                   18     Insurance    Company of Hartford (1975) 52 Cal.App.3d 808; Mars                 v. Wedbush Morgan Securities,

                   19     Inc. (1991) 231    CaLApp.3d 1608.) The Court inAARTS Productions,                Inc.  v.Crocker National Bank

                  20      (1986)   179  Cal.App.3d     1061   set forth the  standard by which the       appellate courts must evaluate        a

                  21      summary judgment motion:

                  22                        "First, we identify the issues framed by the pleadings since it is these
                                            allegations   to  which    the  motion must      respond    by  establishing    a
                  23                        complete defense or otherwise showing there is no factual              basis for
                                            relief  on  any   theory   reasonably    contemplated     by   the  opponent's
                  24                        pleading.   [Citations]   Secondly,    we ,determine     whether   the  moving
                                            party's  showing has     established    facts which negate     the  opponent's
                  25                        claim and justify a judgment in movant's favor.           [Citations]   ...

                  26                        [T]he   third  and  final  step  is to  determine    whether    the opposition
                                            demonstrated the      existence   of a triable,  material   factual  issue  .. ."
                  27                        [Citation]

                  28
                                                                                     3
                                  CHRISTOPHER GUEVARA'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND A UTHORJTIES IN SUPPORT OF
                                  MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,               OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
                     1             If the  defendant    shows   that  one  or  more   of the  elements    of a  cause   of action   cannot   be

                    2     established, or there is a complete defense to a cause of action, the burden then shifts to the plaintiff

                    3     to prove   the  existence   of a  triable  issue of material    fact.  (First  Fidelity  Thrift  & Loan Ass 'n.     v.

                    4     Alliance Bank (1998)       60  Cal.App.4th     1433;  Cal.  Code   Civ.  Pro.   §437(c),   subd.  (o)(2).  Also,  see

                    5     Aguilar v.   Atlantic Richfield Co.     (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826.) Once a defendant establishes a basis for a

                    6     complete defense to plaintiffs case, the burden shifts to plaintiff to produce evidence sufficient to

                    7     make a prima facia showing of the existence of a triable issue of a material                fact.  (Aguilar,   supra,

                    8     25  Cal.4th   at pp.  850-851)    Defendant need      not affirmatively    prove   what   actually  occurred.    It is

                    9     enough to    show that there is insufficient evidence of what occurred or insufficient legal               authority
         a.
        ..J
        ..J
                   10     to establish   a necessary    element   of a cause    of action.  (Browne    v.  Turner   Construction     Company
         w
        ~    'O
      ~  :,,c:: a=!:::    motion    for  summary     judgment.     (Cal.  Code   Civ.   Pro.  §437c    (f) (2).)   A  motion    for  summary
      -  Zz~
      u.-c:(0
                   13
      u....J 0
      0  u,-6
      s    ffi
        0:::I-     14     adjudication shall be granted if it completely disposes of a cause of action, an affirmative defense,
      :5<( ~z
        w <(~
        Cl)~~      15     a claim for damages, or an issue of duty. (Cal.         Code Civ. Pro.     §437c (f) (1).)
        >c.oo
        ZMO
      ~~i:i:!=:                    As  set  forth  herein,  Guevara    did  not  owe   Beletsis   a duty   of care  to  protect  him   nor  did
      - Zz~
      u.-- coo     15                     1.     Guevara Owed No Duty of Care as President of the Local Chapter of Theta
        z  C')O                                Standards     for  Student    Conduct,     is  defined   as:   any   method     of
      ~  ~ 5::!±:
      -LLz zci     13                       initiation or pre-initiation into a student organization or student body,
         - <( U
      LL.JU
      o  cn-c:5                             whether or not the      organization    or body   is officially  recognized    by
      ~a::ffi1-    14                       an  educational    institution,  which    is likely  to  cause   serious   bodily
      ::5< ~z                               injury to   any  former,   current,  or prospective    student   of any   school,
         w <(~
        Cl)~~      15                       community       college,    college,    university     or   other   educational
        >-
        z O
      ~  ~ [i!±:                   There is no special relationship between a defendant and a third-party actor absent the actual
      -
      LL
         Zzc.oo
        ZC'?O
      ~  ::.:::~!::       (Sakiyama    v. AMF Bowling Ctrs.,        Inc. (2003)   110 Cal.   App.   4th 398, 399.)    Under the    statute and
      u::~z-C:00
                   15
         z (Y)<(
         w   Cl)
                          that Guevara provided the alcohol found in the Broadway house, or the alcohol Beletsis drank that
         :c
         I-
                   16
         <(
        :E                evening. (SSUMF #19-#22.)           The evidence supports that Beletsis drank before the after party atthe
                   17
                          Broadway house.       (SSUMF #8, #10.)       The evidence shows that Beletsis drank at the after party but
                   18

                   19     there is no evidence as to whom "furnished" that alcohol. (SSUMF #13.)                  The evidence also shows

                   20     that Beletsis smoked marijuana and consumed cocaine that evening.                  (SSUMF #13-#15.)         There is

                   21     no evidence that Guevara furnished any of these items to Beletsis.               As such, summary judgment is

                          proper.
                  22

                  23      Ill

                  24      Ill

                  25      Ill

                  26      Ill

                  27      Ill

                  28      Ill
                                                                                     8
                                  CHRISTOPHER GUEVARA'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
                                  MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,               OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
                     1                                                   IV. CONCLUSION

                    2              For the   forgoing   reasons,   Christopher    Guevara    respectfully    requests   that the  Court   grant

                    3     summary judgment in his favor.

                    4      Dated:   FebmaryJ?, 2022.                                  MATHENY SEARS LINKERT                 & JAIME LLP
                    5 \_

                    6

                    7

                    8

                    9
         c..
         ..J
         ..J
         w         10
         :E  'V
         < UJ~
        -,2::~     11
        o6 o::
             .ct
           Cl-
      u. t,- 0::Z  12
      Oo::wo::
      en w >0
      ~  ~ ~::j
      -  Zzct
      u.-cto
                   13
      u. _,J 0
      0  u,-6
      ~o::ffii-    14
      :s<~m
         w ct~
        (/) ~~     15
         >
         z o
           (")ct
         w   en
         :c
         .,_       16
         <
        :E         17

                   18

                   19

                   20

                   21

                   22

                   23

                   24

                   25

                   26

                   27

                   28
                                                                                      9
                                  CHRISTOPHER GUEVARA'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
                                  MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,              OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION