Brookhouser

Brookhouser v. State of California

Good Law
10 Cal. App. 4th 1665·13 Cal. Rptr. 2d 658·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1342·92 Daily Journal DAR 15550·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9360
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 19, 1992H007709California7,572 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bamattre-Manoukian, J.

Sharon Brookhouser, a mentally ill person, failed to return from a short leave from an unlocked board and care facility. Two days later she walked onto a highway and was struck and gravely injured by an automobile. Through a guardian ad litem she sued a number of defendants including the State of California and its employee, social worker Ellen Mary Farr, who had been Brookhouser’s assigned case manager at relevant times. As to all defendants other than Farr and the state, Brookhouser’s claims have been either settled or resolved against her. The superior court denied Brookhouser relief, as against Santa Cruz County, from the California Tort Claims Act requirement of a timely claim; on appeal the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial. A first trial resulted in rulings and verdicts in favor of the remaining defendants; upon Brookhouser’s second appeal the First Appellate District reversed the defense judgment as to certain of Brookhouser’s theories of recovery. This third appeal follows a second trial, at which a jury returned special verdicts finding that Farr and the state had violated the Welfare and Institutions Code by failing to give the board and care…

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.