Wheeler v. Sahni CA4/1

California Court of Appeal Mar 24, 2021 No. D076967MUnpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that state-employed psychologists are immune from liability for claims arising from the preparation and approval of a comprehensive risk assessment report for parole proceedings under Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b) and various Government Code immunity provisions.

Issues

Whether respondents are entitled to immunity under Civil Code section 47 and Government Code sections 820.2, 845.8, and 855.8 regarding the preparation of a parole risk assessment.
Whether the Information Practices Act of 1977 or Government Code section 815.6 abrogates the statutory immunities afforded to the respondents.
Whether the trial court erred in sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b) therefore immunizes respondents from all liability for the causes of action and claims alleged here, including defamation, negligence, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.”

“Because the psychologists’ actions involved a parole decision, they are immune from liability.”

Filed 3/24/21 Wheeler v. Sahni CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC WHEELER, D076967 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 37-2019-00012041-CU-NP-CTL) v. NAMEETA SAHNI et al., ORDER DENYING REHEARING & MODIFYING THE OPINION Defendants and Respondents. [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

THE COURT: The petition for rehearing is denied. It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on February 26, 2021, be modified as follows: The words “operative second amended” are removed from the second sentence of the first full paragraph on page one so that the sentence now reads: “He appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered after the court sustained a demurrer to all causes of action in his complaint without leave to amend.”

There is no change in the judgment.

O’ROURKE, Acting P. J. Copies to: All parties

Filed 2/26/21 Wheeler v. Sahni CA4/1 (unmodified opinion) NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC WHEELER, D076967

Plaintiff and Appellant,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2019-00012041-CU-NP-CTL) NAMEETA SAHNI et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Randa Trapp, Judge. Affirmed. Eric Wheeler, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Monica N. Anderson, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Neah Huynh and Andrew M. Gibson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Respondents. Eric Wheeler is a self-represented litigant incarcerated at Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility. He appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered after the court sustained a demurrer to all causes of action in his operative second amended complaint without leave to amend. Respondents are three psychologists employed by the California Department of Corrections

Wheeler v. Sahni CA4/1

AI Brief

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC WHEELER, D076967

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AARON, J.

DATO, J.

AI Brief