Debro

Debro v. Los Angeles Raiders

Good Law
112 Cal. Rptr. 2d 329·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 786·2001 Daily Journal DAR 10763·92 Cal. App. 4th 940·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8682
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 5, 2001No. A094248California6,173 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Stevens, J.

Joseph Debro appeals from a judgment following the sustaining of respondent’s demurrer to his second amended complaint without leave to amend. Debro contends the trial court erred because one of his causes of action, based on the California False Claims Act (Gov. Code, §§ 12650-12655), was not time-barred. We disagree and affirm the judgment.

I. Facts and Procedural History

On August 7, 1995, The Los Angeles Raiders (Raiders) and entities known as the East Bay Entities (the City of Oakland, the County of Alameda, the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority, the OaklandAlameda County Coliseum Financing Corporation, and the OaklandAlameda County Coliseum, Inc.) entered into certain agreements by which the Raiders would play professional football in Oakland through 2011. Under the terms of the master agreement, the Raiders would receive revenue from ticket sales, as well as loans to finance a training facility, and operation expenses. In addition, the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum would be expanded and modernized. The East Bay Entities agreed to finance the stadium renovations and their other obligations through the sale of personal seat licenses, club seats, and…

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.