15-8208 Matthews Demurrer SAC 7/11/2019
Defendant Stockton Unified School District (SUSD or the District) demurs to the Second Amended Complaint (SAC) of Plaintiff Robert Matthews. Having read and considered the written motion, opposition, and reply, the court issues the following tentative ruling:
Defendant’s request for judicial notice is granted.
“[T]he claim filing requirement is not an administrative remedy. [See Lozada v. City and County of San Francisco (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 1139, 1155] [ “The origin and purposes of the government claim filing requirements and the administrative remedies exhaustion doctrine differ, and elimination of the exhaustion requirement does not release a litigant from the need to comply with Government Claims Act requirements.” ].)” (Olson v. Manhattan Beach Unified School Dist. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 1052, 1063.)
As to the First cause of action for Retaliation under Labor Code section 1102.5, Plaintiff alleges in ¶ 9 of his SAC that he filed a compl
Hearing Date
July 09, 2019
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
15-8208 Matthews Demurrer SAC 7/11/2019
Defendant Stockton Unified School District (SUSD or the District) demurs to the Second Amended Complaint (SAC) of Plaintiff Robert Matthews. Having read and considered the written motion, opposition, and reply, the court issues the following tentative ruling:
Defendant’s request for judicial notice is granted.
“[T]he claim filing requirement is not an administrative remedy. [See Lozada v. City and County of San Francisco (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 1139, 1155] [ “The origin and purposes of the government claim filing requirements and the administrative remedies exhaustion doctrine differ, and elimination of the exhaustion requirement does not release a litigant from the need to comply with Government Claims Act requirements.” ].)” (Olson v. Manhattan Beach Unified School Dist. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 1052, 1063.)
As to the First cause of action for Retaliation under Labor Code section 1102.5, Plaintiff alleges in ¶ 9 of his SAC that he filed a compl