Hall

Hall v. Regents of University of California

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 292·43 Cal. App. 4th 1580·51 Cal. Rptr. 2d 387·96 Daily Journal DAR 3582·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2202
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1996C021360California2,111 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brown, J.

Code of Civil Procedure section 1038 authorizes an award of defense costs in any civil proceeding under the California Tort Claims Act “If the court should determine that the proceeding was not brought in good faith and with reasonable cause, . . In the context of the Tort Claims Act, the statute “ ‘provides public entities with a protective remedy for defending against unmeritorious litigation’ [citation] as a judicially approved alternative to a constitutionally proscribed action for malicious prosecution.” (Knight v. City of Capitola (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 918, 931 [ 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 874 ].)

The sole question in this appeal is whether plaintiff Justine Hall maintained her medical negligence action “in good faith and with reasonable cause” when, in order to avoid a possible “empty chair” defense by codefendants, her attorney made the tactical decision to keep The Regents of the University of California (Regents) in the case through summary judgment. We conclude Hall’s reasons for refusing to dismiss the Regents did not constitute reasonable cause within the meaning of section 1038. Accordingly, we reverse the portion of the judgment which denied the Regents defense costs…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.