In Shah v. Department of Resources, published June 15, 2023, the 3rd District Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court decision sustained a demurrer without leave to amend and dismissing the action as barred by the statute of limitations. California's Employee Suggestion Program awarded employees cash awards for suggestions that saved the state money. The plaintiff, an employee of the Department of Transportation, allegedly made cost-saving suggestions that saved the state millions of dollars. The state recommended cash awards for each suggestion, but then reevaluated and denied them. The plaintiff appealed to the State Merit Award Board, which operates under the umbrella of the California Department of Human Resources (CalHR). On October 24, 2018, the Board issued its final decision denying the appeal and upholding denial of the awards. On April 19, 2019, the plaintiff presented a claim for damages to the state. It was not acted upon. On November 13, 2019, the plaintiff sued the Department of Transportation and the Board, alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and misappropriation of trade secrets. CalHR demurred to the complaint, arguing that the action was barred under the one-year statute of limitations for actions against CalHR under Government Code section 19815.8. The trial court rejected the plaintiff's argument that the applicable statute of limitations was the two-year period under Government Code section 945.6, subdivision (a)(2) that applies where a claim for damages is presented to a public entity and not acted upon.
The appellate court agreed. It is settled that a specific statute of limitations takes precedence over a more general statute of limitations. Government Code section 945.6 is the more general statute of limitations; it applies generally to claims against public entities, while section 19815.8 applies only against claims related to a law administered by CalHR. Further, a shorter limitations period takes precedence over a longer one unless the statutes can be harmonized. Because the two limitation periods cannot be harmonized, section 19815.8, the shorter limitation, takes precedence. While the time for presenting a claim under Government Code section 911.2 is shorter than section 19815.8, that claim presentation period is not a statute of limitations. No authority prioritizes the limitations periods in the Government Claims Act over other limitations period. Such a determination would render section 19815.8 meaningless, since any claim related to a law administered by CalHR would arguably also be governed by the Government Claims Act.
Comments