Bate v. Los Angeles County MTA CA2/4

Filed 3/5/13 Bate v. Los Angeles County MTA CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

DARI BATES, B238783

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC454192) v.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ramona G. See, Judge. Affirmed. Dari Bates, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Sylvester, Oppenheim & Linde and Alan Varner for Defendant and Respondent.

Appellant Dori Bates appeals from a judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of a demurrer to her first amended complaint. The order sustaining the demurrer was with leave to amend but appellant did not amend, and the judgment followed after her time to amend had expired. The demurrer was brought, and the order sustaining it was made, on multiple grounds, including uncertainty, failure to state a cause of action on various grounds, failure to make a timely claim, and the discretionary act immunity. It is not necessary to discuss all of these grounds since at least one of them, discretionary act immunity, commands the result on appeal. The thrust of the appeal concerns the purported illegality of what appellant and the trial court refer to as the “stroller rule”. Essentially, appellant alleges that on July 22, 2010, as well as on many other occasions, she attempted to board a public transportation bus operated by respondent Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA). She was pushing a stroller at the time, and the driver refused to allow her to board, despite knowledge by MTA that she had a disabled person pass. Instead, the driver closed the doors of the bus on the double stroller she was pushing. Appellant’s one and one-half-year-old grandchild was in the stroller, which was fully opened. The opened stroller was 46 inches long, 48 inches high and 16 inches wide. It was loaded underneath and on the bars used for pushing with bags of groceries. Altogether it weighed 62 to 69 pounds. ~CT 49)~ The bus driver would not allow appellant to board with the open stroller because of the MTA’s “stroller rule”, which appellant sets out in full in her complaint. The rule, numbered 6-05-070, provides: “A. Commercial or large size carts, or dollies and strollers are prohibited on Metro vehicles, unless collapsed. If a small personal use size stroller is occupied by a child or small cart is filled, then it must be securely held and not block passageways.