DEMURRER to Amended COMPLAINT
Set for Law and Motion/Discovery on Wednesday, June 25, 2025 Line 6, DEFENDANT SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT's DEMURRER to Amended COMPLAINT.
Defendant's demurrer to cause of action eight for violation of Education Code section 220 et seq is overruled. First, it is dubious whether the complaint and appeal process under Education Code section 262.3 is required for plaintiff to perfect her Education Code claim. Education Code section 262.3(c) provides that: "Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require an exhaustion of the administrative complaint process before civil law remedies may be pursued." "We give the words of a statute their ordinary and usual meaning and construe them in the context of the statute as a whole." (American Liberty Bail Bonds, Inc. v. Garamendi (2006) 141 Cal.App.4th 1044, 1052.)
In any event, plaintiff alleges that she presented a government tort claim to defendant. (First Amended Complaint, pars. 26-28.) The government claim serves the same purpose as the Education Code complaint process, i.e., to allow for an investigation and possible resolution. (5 CCR 4630(b); Donovan v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567, 607.) Because the government claim serves the same purpose as the Education Code complaint, cases have persuasively held that compliance with the Government Claims Act alone is sufficient to perfect the Education Code claim. (See Saar v. Oakland Unified School District (N.D. Cal., May 24, 2021, No. 21-CV-01690-KAW) 2021 WL 9758808 at *7.) Lastly, the court notes that the Education Code is remedial and courts favor disposition of matters on the merits.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept301tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(301/JT) | |