Emme

Emme v. Morr CA6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 23, 2014H039562California1,878 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elia, J.

Background Because this appeal arises from the sustaining of a demurrer, we summarize the underlying facts as they are stated in the operative pleading, the first amended complaint. Toward this end "we accept as true the properly pleaded material factual allegations of the complaint, together with facts that may properly be judicially noticed." (Crowley v. Katleman (1994) 8 Cal.4th 666, 672; Moore v. Regents of University of California (1990) 51 Cal.3d 120, 125.) Plaintiff filed his first amended complaint in propria persona on October 31, 2012, asserting 12 claims against the District, three of its employees, and a union official.1 He alleged that the District was responsible for continual insults directed at him by District employees beginning in the 1980s. Plaintiff attempted to describe numerous events in which various employees, mostly bus drivers, insulted and ridiculed him with sexually charged names and crude gestures. The incidents plaintiff related took place from the 1980s through August or September of 2011. Much of the conduct he described was not attributed to any named defendant. He did relate how a woman plaintiff "believe[d]" to be defendant Bonnie Morr made…

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.