Jane Roe TT 80 v. Doe 1

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants in part and denies in part defendants’ motion to dismiss claims arising from alleged childhood sexual abuse. The court holds that the certificates of merit filed under California Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1 are sufficient and rejects defendants’ argument that a remote interview by a California-licensed mental health practitioner rendered the certificate invalid. The court dismisses the sixth cause of action for breach of mandatory duty and strikes the prayer for attorney’s fees.

Holdings

1. The certificate of merit satisfied section 340.1(g)(2), and the court found, based solely on the certificates, a reasonable and meritorious cause for filing the action against defendants. The speculative possibility that the interview occurred by Zoom while plaintiff was outside California did not make the certificate legally insufficient.
2. The sixth cause of action was dismissed.
3. The prayer for attorney fees was stricken.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the mental-health-practitioner certificate of merit satisfied California Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1(g)(2) despite defendants' speculation that the interview occurred by Zoom while plaintiff was physically present in Texas.
2. Whether the complaint's sixth cause of action for breach of mandatory duty to report suspected child abuse should be dismissed because clergy were not mandatory reporters when the alleged abuse occurred.
3. Whether plaintiff's prayer for attorney fees should be stricken absent a statute or contract authorizing recovery.

Disposition

other