Amy McConnell v. Lassen County

Good Law
442 F. App'x 264
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 7, 201110-16023California274 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-Appellant, Amy McConnell (McConnell), individually and on behalf of her four minor children, appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee, Environmental Alternatives (EA), and imposing sanctions against her attorneys.

1. The district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of EA. McConnell failed to raise a material issue of fact regarding EA’s purported breach of duty. Indeed, it was not foreseeable that molestation would occur in the foster home. See J.L. v. Children’s Institute, Inc., 177 Cal.App.4th 388, 396 , 99 Cal.Rptr.3d 5 (2009) (noting the lack of “duty to protect the plaintiff from unforeseeable third party criminal conduct”) (citations omitted).

2. The district court acted within its discretion in allocating the burden of production for admission of the letter from one of the caseworkers. Parties seeking the admission of evidence bear the burden of showing its admissibility. See Oracle Corp. Sec. Litig., 627 F.3d 376, 385 (9th Cir.2010). Because McConnell sought admission of the letter, the district court properly placed the burden of authentication on her. See id.

3. Neither did…

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.