March 4, 2011

Summary of March 2, 2011 conference report for civil cases

The following is our summary of the Supreme Court’s actions on petitions for review in civil cases from the Court’s conference on Wednesday, March 2, 2011. The summary includes those civil cases in which (1) review has been granted (not including grant-and-transfers), (2) review has been denied but one or more justices has voted for review, (3) the Court has ordered depublished an opinion of the Court of Appeal, or (4) the Court has denied a Court of Appeal’s publication request. This week the Court once again has employed its often used grant-and-hold procedure, a topic we discussed in depth here.

Review Granted

Jane Roe 21 v. Defendant Doe 1 et al., S189814 —Review Granted and Held—March 2, 2011

This is an action by an adult plaintiff seeking to hold Catholic Church entities liable for child sexual abuse allegedly perpetrated by clergy decades ago. The question presented is whether the plaintiff’s claims are time-barred or whether the plaintiff is entitled to rely on the “delayed discovery” provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1, which pertains to claims of childhood sexual abuse against specified non-perpetrators who knew of the abuse and had the ability to prevent it but failed to do so.

In an unpublished decision, the Third District Court of Appeal (C062505) agreed with the result reached by the Second District, Division Eight, in Hightower v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Sacramento (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 759, and held that the plaintiff is not entitled to rely on section 340.1’s delayed discovery provisions.

The same issue is pending before the Court in Quarry v. Doe 1, S171382. Other Third District cases presenting the same issue are also being held pending final adjudication in Quarry.

Review Denied (with dissenting justices)




Court of Appeal Publication Request Denied


Leave a Reply