Quinn v. County of San Luis Obispo CA2/6

Filed 6/21/21 Quinn v. County of San Luis Obispo CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

MAUREEN QUINN, 2d Civ. No. B309170 (Super. Ct. No. 20CVP-0095) Plaintiff and Appellant, (San Luis Obispo County)

v.

COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,

Defendant and Respondent.

Plaintiff claimed the crowing of her neighbors’ roosters constitutes a public nuisance. She sued the county in propria persona for failure to abate the alleged nuisance. The trial court granted the county judgment on the pleadings on plaintiff’s second amended complaint, and refused to issue a preliminary injunction requiring the county to abate the alleged nuisance. We affirm. FACTS Maureen Quinn’s second amended complaint against the County of San Luis Obispo (County) alleged as follows:

Quinn lives in a mobile home in a rural part of the County. Her home is separated by one lot from property owned by people who are not parties to this action (neighbors). The neighbors keep roosters in a battery of cages. The roosters crow day and night. The crowing causes Quinn to suffer severe sleep deprivation, headaches, agitation, and difficulty focusing. Quinn called the County’s animal services several times to complain about the noise. The County sent her a form to request that the County issue a citation to the neighbors. Quinn filled out the form and returned it to the County, but the County refused to investigate. Quinn had a number of confrontations with her neighbors over the noise. The neighbors have a video on which Quinn says, “Shut your fucking roosters up. I’ll go get my gun.” The neighbors obtained a restraining order against Quinn. Quinn claimed the video had been tampered with. Quinn contacted the County animal services again. She spoke with the head of animal services, Eric Anderson. Anderson told her that his duties do not include addressing complaints about roosters, especially in rural areas. Quinn continued to complain to animal services. Quinn alleges her mental health continued to deteriorate. She felt mentally ill. She sought help from a number of mental health providers. They could not help her because her problem was caused by external stimuli. The County’s district attorney charged Quinn with six counts of violating the restraining order obtained by her neighbors. A jury trial is pending.