Contract Breaches Need Claims Too

A new California Supreme Court Case, City of Stockton v. Superior Court (Civic Partners Stockton, LLC) , filed December 3, 2007 settles several important issues concerning the Government Code's claim requirements for suing public entities:

• Resolving a longtime split in authority, the Court ruled that the claim-presentation requirements apply to breach of contract claims that seek damages.  They are not limited to tort claims.
• Because the Government Code sections controlling claims and liability of public entities apply to more than just claims, the Court proclaimed it would no longer describe Government Code section 810 et seq as the "Tort Claims Act."  Instead, it will refer to the statutes as the "Government Claims Act."
• Government Code section 814, which states that nothing in "this party" applies to breach of contract, only deals with the immunity portions of the Government Claims Act.  The claim requirements have nothing to do with Governmental immunity.
• A plaintiff cannot argue that the entity is estopped from enforcing the claim-presentation requirements unless the plaintiff can identify a specific act or statement by the entity that prevented or deterred it from filing a timely claim.
• An entity does not waive the claim-presentation requirements by waiting until the claim-presentation period has expired before asserting the requirements.  The defendant here did not waive the requirements by filing multiple demurrers that did not assert the plaintiff''s failure to present a claim.
• Correspondence does not constitute a "claim as presented" -- requiring the entity to respond with a Notice of Insufficiency or else waive the claim requirement -- unless it "specifically alert[s] defendants to weigh the alternatives of litigation or compromise."