Cox v. Superior Court of Amador County

Filed 7/22/16 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Amador) ----

ERNEST L. COX, C080870

Petitioner, (Super. Ct. Nos. 15 CV 9354 & 15 HC 1760) v.

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF AMADOR COUNTY,

Respondent;

SCOTT KERNAN, as Secretary, etc., et al.,

Real Parties in Interest.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING in mandate. Petition granted. Steve Hermanson, Judge.

Ernest L. Cox, in propria persona for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Jennifer A. Neill, Assistant Attorney General, Jessica N. Blonien and Yun Hwa Harper, Deputy Attorneys General, for Real Parties in Interest.

1

Petitioner Ernest L. Cox is incarcerated at Mule Creek State Prison. He filed a civil complaint against real parties in interest, officials and employees of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), seeking monetary damages. Simultaneously, he filed a petition for relief from the government claims filing requirement. Respondent superior court deemed the civil complaint to be a petition for writ of habeas corpus, which the court then denied. Petitioner filed a petition for writ of mandate in this court, asserting respondent superior court erred in deeming the civil complaint to be a habeas corpus petition and that the court must consider his petition for relief from the government claims filing requirement on its merits. Real parties in interest concede respondent superior court erred. We agree, and order the issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate. BACKGROUND Petitioner filed a civil complaint against officials and employees of CDCR. The complaint is not a model of clarity, but in general alleges claims of sexual harassment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violation of due process. The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages; injunctive relief, including directing CDCR to develop training regarding sexual harassment, and dismissing prison discipline imposed on petitioner; and a judicial declaration that a prison regulation regarding unlawful influence is vague and uncertain. Simultaneously, petitioner filed a petition for relief from the government claims filing requirement of Government Code section 945.4,1 pursuant to Government Code section 946.6, subdivision (a).2