MP

Not all of the opinions of the California Supreme Court have stood the test of time. 1 So it may be with respect to an issue raised in this case.

*124 During the Pom Star Costume Ball at a Sacramento hotel in 2004, a Sacramento Fire Department captain allegedly allowed firefighters to attend the event and even to drive a firetruck there and use it to “pick up” women.

The situation led to a lawsuit and this appeal, which presents the question whether the City of Sacramento can be vicariously liable for nonconsensual sexual assaults alleged to have been committed in the firetruck by two firefighters (one of whom was off duty at the time) against a woman (a photographer at the event) who had accepted their invitation to take pictures of them on the firetruck.

At issue is the California Supreme Court’s decision in Mary M. v. City of Los Angeles (1991) 54 Cal.3d 202 [ 285 Cal.Rptr. 99 , 814 P.2d 1341 ] (hereafter Mary M.), which held a public entity that employs a police officer can be vicariously liable for a rape committed by the officer against a woman he detained while on duty. The decision was a departure from the ordinary rale that an employee who commits a sex crime…

Respectfully, I dissent. The distinguishing fact in this case from the cases cited by my colleagues is that plaintiff’s complaint alleged the City of Sacramento (City) had a policy that *135 made sexual assault by firefighters foreseeable. Thus, my disagreement lies not in the case law as analyzed by my colleagues, but rather that in this summary adjudication procedure, the City ignored allegations in the complaint that, in my opinion, made sexual assault by firefighters foreseeable.

Plaintiff’s complaint alleged the City had a policy that made sexual assault by firefighters foreseeable.

The complaint alleged “The Defendant CITY and Defendant FIRE DEPARTMENT have had policies in place where captains and firefighters were permitted to take fire trucks and engine trucks to bars and parties, and with captains present, pick up on women and take women on their fire trucks. The City of Sacramento and Sacramento Fire Department firefighters took advantage of their status as firefighters and the post 9/11 public sentiment perception that firefighters are ‘heroes.’ They abused their authority by picking up women and drinking on the job. [][] This practice of drinking on the job and…

Not all of the opinions of the California Supreme Court have stood the test of time. [1] So it may be with respect to an issue raised in this case.

During the Porn Star Costume Ball at a Sacramento hotel in 2004, a Sacramento Fire Department captain allegedly allowed firefighters to attend the event and even to drive a firetruck there and use it to "pick up" women.

The situation led to a lawsuit and this appeal, which presents the question whether the City of Sacramento can be vicariously liable for nonconsensual sexual assaults alleged to have been committed in the firetruck by two firefighters (one of whom was off duty at the time) against a woman (a photographer at the event) who had accepted their invitation to take pictures of them on the firetruck.

(1) At issue is the California Supreme Court's decision in Mary M. v. City of Los Angeles (1991) 54 Cal.3d 202 [ 285 Cal.Rptr. 99 , 814 P.2d 1341 ] (hereafter Mary M. ), which held a public entity that employs a police officer can be vicariously liable for a rape committed by the officer against a woman he detained while on duty. The decision was a departure from the ordinary rule that an employee who commits…