The following is our summary of the Supreme Court’s actions on petitions for review in civil cases from the Court’s conference on August 9, 2017. The summary includes those civil cases in which (1) review has been granted, (2) review has been denied but one or more justices has voted for review, or (3) the Court has ordered depublished an opinion of the Court of Appeal.
Review Granted
Quigley v. Garden Valley Fire Protection District, S242250 – Review Granted – August 9, 2017
This was an action by a firefighter injured when she was run over by a fire truck while sleeping at a fire base camp. In a published decision, Quigley v. Garden Valley Fire Protection District (2017) 10 Cal.App.5th 1135, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order granting nonsuit in favor of the defendant fire protection districts. The Court of Appeal held that: (1) governmental immunity is jurisdictional and can be raised at any time and thus is not subject to the rule that failure to raise a defense by demurrer or answer waives that defense; (2) the plaintiff firefighter’s injuries were covered by Government Code section 850.4’s firefighting immunity, which provides immunity regardless of whether the condition of the firefighting equipment or facilities affects the ability to fight fires.
The questions presented in the Supreme Court are as follows: (1) Did defendants forfeit the immunity provided under Government Code section 850.4 for governmental entities involved in firefighting by failing to timely raise the defense before trial? (2) Does section 850.4 apply to immunize defendants in an action for personal injuries allegedly caused by a dangerous condition of property being used as a firefighting facility, where plaintiff’s injuries did not result from a condition of that property that rendered it inoperative, useless, or otherwise less effective in aiding defendant’s firefighting efforts?
Review Denied (with dissenting justices)
None.
Depublished
Hardesty v. State Mining and Geology Board, S242755– Depublished Court of Appeal Opinion– August 9, 2017
This was an action under the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) (Pub. Resources Code § 2710 et. seq.) in which the plaintiffs challenged findings by the State Mining and Geology Board. The Board’s disputed findings concluded plaintiffs had no vested rights to surface mine at a particular location. The Board’s findings effectively denied plaintiffs a “grandfather” exemption from the need to obtain a County mining permit. (See § 2776, subd. (a).) The trial court denied the plaintiff’s petition for writ of administrative mandate. Plaintiffs then appealed from the judgment.
On appeal, plaintiffs argued, inter alia, the Board and the trial court misunderstood the legal force of their 19th century federal mining patents. They asserted that those patents established a vested right to surface mine after the passage of SMARA without the need to prove they were surface mining on SMARA’s operative date of January 1, 1976. In a published opinion, Hardesty v. State Mining and Geology Board (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 790, the Third District Court of Appeal held 19th century federal mining patents have no effect on the application of state mining regulations. The Supreme Court ordered the opinion depublished.