Greg Hill & Associates Home
Award Recipient
Top 100 Trial Attorneys in the United States
Contact Us for a Free Consultation
State Court – Who is Immune from Civil Liability?
Under California law, at Government Code § 810, et seq. (“The California Government Claims Act”), the State of California and its agencies are usually immune from tort liability for injuries or wrongs caused by its officials and employees. Government Code § 815; Government Code § 844.6(a).
If the plaintiff is not being held in a prison or jail facility, a public entity is liable for any injury proximately caused by an act or omission of an employee of the public entity acting within the scope of his employment that would give rise to a cause of action against that employee. Government Code § 815.2.
One court has held that the state and its agencies are not immune from suit by plaintiff who is on parole and suing about a parole matter. Fearon v. California Dept. of Corrections (1984) 162 Cal. App. 3d 1254, 209 Cal. Rptr. 309 (allowing person on parole to sue the CDCR for negligently losing his property). It also appears that the immunities do not apply to lawsuits brought by patients in the Department of State Hospitals. See Sykora v. Dept. of State Hospitals (2014) 255 Cal. App. 4th 1530 1532-1533, 171 Cal. Rptr. 3d 583.
It should be noted that the state is immune from liability for injury resulting from a determination to release a person on parole or to deny or revoke parole. Government Code § 845.8; Torres v. California Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation (2013) 217 Cal. App. 4th 844, 158 Cal. Rptr. 3d 876 (the CDCR was immune from liability for an erroneous decision to revoke parole).
This immunity does not extend to injury caused by continuing to incarcerate a person on a parole hold after the parole agents knew or should have known that they had arrested the wrong person. Perez-Torres v. California (2007) 42 Cal. 4th 136, 142, 64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 155.
Moreover, the state of California, state agencies like the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH), and the prisons usually cannot be sued by people in prison under state tort law. See, e.g., Leyva v. Nielsen (2000) 83 Cal. App. 4th 1061, 100 Cal. Rptr. 2d 231; Wright v. California (2004) 122 Cal. App. 4th 659, 19 Cal. Rptr. 3d 92; but see Lawson v. Superior Court (2010) 180 Cal. App. 4th 1372, 103 Cal. Rptr. 3d 834 (immunities for public entities did not apply to private company that operated prison-mother facility or to its employees; also, immunities that apply to lawsuits brought by people in prison did not apply when injuries were to daughter of person in a prison-mother program).
The same types of immunities also apply to lawsuits by people in jail against a city or county or a local agency. Government Code § 811.2; Government Code § 844; see Zeilman v. County of Kern (1985) 168 Cal. App. 3d 1174, 214 Cal. Rptr. 746; Badiggo v. County of Ventura (1989) 207 Cal. App. 3d 357, 254 Cal. Rptr. 771.
There are some exceptions to the state’s immunity. These exceptions allow people in prison to sue the state and its agencies for money damages under state tort law in the following circumstances:
- Injury was caused by a public employee’s failure to take reasonable action to summon medical care, where the public employee knew or had reason to know that the person needed immediate medical care. Government Code § 844.6(a); Government Code § 845.6; see Watson v. California (1993) 21 Cal. App. 4th 836, 26 Cal. Rptr. 2d 262 (liability limited to serious and obvious medical conditions); Lucas v. County of Los Angeles (1996) 47 Cal. App. 4th 277, 54 Cal. Rptr. 2d 655; but see Lawson, supra (immunity of both state and employee where depriving person in prison-mother program of medication and breast pump did not amount to failure to act in response to need for immediate medical care).
This exception does not extend to claims that a state employee provided negligent medical care. See, e.g., Castaneda v. California Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation (2013) 212 Cal. App. 4th 1051, 1072-1074, 151 Cal. Rptr. 3d 648 (the state was immune from liability for injury to a person in prison who died of cancer; the duty to “summon” medical care did not require consultation with specialist after the person’s cancer diagnosis).
A public employee, acting in the scope of employment, caused death or injury by negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle. Government Code § 844.6(b); Vehicle Code §§ 17000-17004.5. However, in some cases, the public entity may be immune for accidents that happen while an employee is responding to an emergency call or pursuing a person suspected of a crime. Vehicle Code § 17004; Vehicle Code § 17004.7.
A public employee caused damage by intentionally and unjustifiably interfering with the right to obtain judicial review of the legality of the incarceration. However, a person cannot sue on this ground until after court determines that the incarceration was illegal. Government Code § 844.6(a); Government Code § 845.4.
A public employee caused injury due to a determination as to whether to parole or release a person, whether to revoke parole or release, or by imposing conditions of parole or release. Government Code § 845.8(a). This immunity does not extend to incarceration after the public employee knew or should have known the person being held for revocation proceedings was not actually a person on parole. Perez-Torres v. California (2007) 42 Cal. 4th 136, 141-142, 64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 155.
The physical injuries were caused by a wrongful or negligent act during the course of biomedical or behavioral research. Penal Code § 3524.
Damage was suffered as a result of a breach of a contract. Government Code § 814; Government Code § 844.6(a).
The case involves liability under worker’s compensation law (see § 4.43). Government Code § 814.2; Government Code § 844.6(a); or
The claims are for non-monetary relief only, such as a request for an injunction or declaratory relief. Government Code § 814; Government Code § 844.6(a).
While this article appears on our website, one should not credit Greg Hill & Associates with its content. Instead, credit is due to the Prison Law Office in Folsom, California and their wonderful treatise, California Prison and Parole Law Handbook, from which this article is largely based. We thank the Prison Law Office for their excellent work.
