Janis v. Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency CA3

Filed 3/25/24 Janis v. Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

LYLE JANIS, C098094

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 34-2022- 00326831-CU-PT-GDS) v.

SACRAMENTO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY,

Defendant and Respondent.

This appeal arises out of the failure to comply with the claim presentation requirements of the Government Claims Act (Gov. Code, § 810 et seq.) (the Act).1 The Act provides that no suit for money or damages may be brought against a public entity unless a claim has first been presented to the public entity and rejected by it. (§ 945.4.) A claim for personal injuries must be presented within six months of the accrual of the

1 Further undesignated statutory references are to the Government Code.

1

cause of action. (§ 911.2, subd. (a).) If it is not, the injured party may file an application with the public entity for leave to present a late claim. (§ 911.4, subd. (b).) If the application is denied, the injured party may file a petition in the superior court seeking relief from the claim presentation requirements of the Act. (§ 946.6, subd. (a).) The superior court “shall” grant the petition if, among other things, “[t]he failure to present the claim was through mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” (§ 946.6, subds. (b)(2) & (c)(1).) In this case, plaintiff and appellant Lyle Janis appeals the trial court’s decision denying his petition seeking relief from the claim presentation requirement of the Act. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In ruling on a petition for relief from the claim presentation requirements, the trial court considers “the petition, any affidavits in support of or in opposition to the petition, and any additional evidence received at the hearing on the petition.” (§ 946.6, subd. (e).) The facts below thus come from these sources. On September 21, 2021, Janis sustained personal injuries when the bicycle he was riding was struck by a motor vehicle driven by Wilfredo Buenafe. Janis contended the accident was Buenafe’s fault because he failed to make a complete stop at a stop sign and failed to yield the right of way to Janis. Janis retained counsel sometime in September 2021, and in November 2021, his attorney requested a copy of the traffic collision report (the Report). Janis’s attorney stated the Report was delivered to her office sometime in December, and that it identified a public entity—namely, defendant and respondent Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency (SHRA)—that was potentially liable for Janis’s injuries.2 The