Ingram v. County of Glenn

WARNE, J. pro tem.

*

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of respondents in an action whereby appellant sought to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been suffered as the proximate result of the negligence of the re

[650]

spondents while she was a patient in the hospital of respondent county. The judgment was entered after appellant elected not to amend her complaint to which a demurrer had been sustained with leave to amend.

The complaint in substance alleges that the appellant was a patient in the Glenn General Hospital, which was being operated by the county of Glenn, a subdivision of the state of California; that the respondent Albert O. Pugatch was employed by, and acted as the superintendent of, said hospital; that on or about the 29th day of March, 1958, while appellant was a paying patient in said hospital, and as the result of the negligence of respondents, she was examined by a male person, whose identity is unknown, who then and there committed unlawful, indecent and lewd acts upon the person of appellant, which thereby caused the injuries and damages as alleged in her complaint. It is further alleged that said hospital was not “engaged in a purely governmental activity.”

Again, as we said in

Durst

v.

County of Colusa,

166 Cal. App.2d 623 [333 P.2d 789] (hearing denied by the Supreme Court), at page 625: ‘‘Such a cause of action does not lie against a county.

(Griffin

v.

County of Colusa,

44 Cal.App.2d 915 [113 P.2d 270] ;

Calkins

v.

Newton,

36 Cal.App.2d 262 [97 P.2d 523] ;

Latham

v.