Opinion ID: 2631047
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Government Claims Statute

Text: Before suing a public entity, the plaintiff must present a timely written claim for damages to the entity. (Gov. Code, § 911.2; State of California v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1234, 1239, 13 Cal.Rptr.3d 534, 90 P.3d 116 (Bodde), but see Gov.Code, § 905 [itemized exceptions not relevant here].) In 1979 and 1980, a claim relating to a cause of action for injury to person had to be presented to a government entity not later than the 100th day after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov.Code, § 911.2, added by Stats. 1963, ch. 1715, § 1, p. 3376.) Since 1988, such claims must be presented to the government entity no later than six months after the cause of action accrues. (Gov.Code, § 911.2, as amended by Stats. 1987, ch. 1208, § 3, p. 4306.) Accrual of the cause of action for purposes of the government claims statute is the date of accrual that would pertain under the statute of limitations applicable to a dispute between private litigants. (Gov.Code, § 901; Whitfield v. Roth (1974) 10 Cal.3d 874, 884-885, 112 Cal.Rptr. 540, 519 P.2d 588; Jefferson v. County of Kern (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 606, 615, 120 Cal.Rptr.2d 1; Dujardin v. Ventura County Gen. Hosp. (1977) 69 Cal.App.3d 350, 355, 138 Cal. Rptr. 20.) Timely claim presentation is not merely a procedural requirement, but is, as this court long ago concluded, `a condition precedent to plaintiffs maintaining an action against defendant' (Bodde, supra, 32 Cal.4th at p. 1240, 13 Cal. Rptr.3d 534, 90 P.3d 116, quoting Williams v. Horvath (1976) 16 Cal.3d 834, 842, 129 Cal.Rptr. 453, 548 P.2d 1125), and thus an element of the plaintiffs cause of action. (Bodde, supra, at p. 1240, 13 Cal.Rptr.3d 534, 90 P.3d 116.) Complaints that do not allege facts demonstrating either that a claim was timely presented or that compliance with the claims statute is excused are subject to a general demurrer for not stating facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Bodde, supra, at p. 1245, 13 Cal. Rptr.3d 534, 90 P.3d 116.) Only after the public entity's board has acted upon or is deemed to have rejected the claim may the injured person bring a lawsuit alleging a cause of action in tort against the public entity. (Gov.Code §§ 912.4, 945.4; Williams v. Horvath, supra, 16 Cal.3d at p. 838, 129 Cal.Rptr. 453, 548 P.2d 1125.) The deadline for filing a lawsuit against a public entity, as set out in the government claims statute, is a true statute of limitations defining the time in which, after a claim presented to the government has been rejected or deemed rejected, the plaintiff must file a complaint alleging a cause of action based on the facts set out in the denied claim. (Code Civ. Proa, § 342; Gov.Code, § 945.6; Addison v. State of California (1978) 21 Cal.3d 313, 316, 146 Cal.Rptr. 224, 578 P.2d 941; Tubbs v. Southern Cal. Rapid Transit Dist. (1967) 67 Cal.2d 671, 675, 63 Cal.Rptr. 377, 433 P.2d 169; County of Los Angeles, supra, 127 Cal.App.4th 1263, 1271, 26 Cal.Rptr.3d 445; Martell v. Antelope Valley Hosp. Med. Center (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 978, 981-982, 79 Cal.Rptr.2d 329; see Cal. Law Revision Com. com., reprinted at 32A pt. 1 West's Ann. Gov. Code (1995 ed.) foil. § 945.6, p. 33 (1963 Addition).) The six-month statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit that is generally applicable to actions against public defendants (Code Civ. Proc., § 342; Gov.Code, § 945.6, subd. (a)(1)) is not implicated by the facts here. Rather, it is the claim presentation deadline (Code Civ. Proc., § 313; Gov.Code, § 911.2) that is at issue, as we explain below.