When a written claim for money or damages for injury has been presented to the employing public entity:
(a)A cause of action for such injury may not be maintained against the public employee or former public employee whose act or omission caused such injury until the claim has been rejected, or has been deemed to have been rejected, in whole or in part by the public entity.
(b)A suit against the public employee or former public employee for such injury must be commenced within the time prescribed by Section 945.6 for bringing an action against the public entity.
(c)When a person is unable to commence the suit within the time prescribed in subdivision (b) because he has been sentenced to imprisonment in a state prison, the time limited for the commencement of such suit is extended to six months after the date that the civil right to commence such action is restored to such person, except that the time shall not be extended if the public employee or former public employee establishes that the plaintiff failed to make a reasonable effort to commence the suit, or to obtain a restoration of his civil right to do so, before the expiration of the time prescribed in subdivision (b).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
11
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1968–2024 · leading case:
Austin v. Medicis, 230 Cal. Rptr. 3d 528 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018).
Austin v. Medicis, 230 Cal. Rptr. 3d 528 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018).
“" (Gov. Code, § 950.6, subd. (c), emphasis added.”
Massa v. S. California Rapid Transit Dist., 43 Cal. App. 4th 1217 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “As we have discussed, Government Code section 950.6 requires that a written claim for money or damages for injury be presented to the employing *1222 public entity as a prerequisite to suing the agency or any of its employees who are claimed to have acted within their official…”
Williams v. Los Angeles Metro. Transit Auth., 440 P.2d 497 (Cal. 1968).
“As another illustration, Government Code section 950.6 setting forth a six-month limitation period for actions against public employees, includes a provision tolling the statute for felons identical with that in section 945.”
Salzer v. Barff, 2010 S.D. 96 (S.D. 2010).
“Cal. Gov.Code § 950.6(b); Fla. Stat. § 768.”
Guzman v. Van Demark, 651 F. Supp. 1180 (C.D. Cal. 1987).
“Cal.Govt.Code § 950.6. 16 Therefore, the Guzmans’ complaint would have been timely as late as August 23, 1986.”
Ramachandran v. City of L. Altos, 359 F. Supp. 3d 801 (2019).
“In general, "no suit for money or damages may be brought against a public entity on a cause of action for which a claim is required to be presented .”
Austin v. Medicis (Cal. Ct. App. 2018).
“” (Gov. Code, § 950.6, subd. (c), emphasis added.”
Barron v. Galvin CA5 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021).
“(Gov. Code, § 950.6, subd. (b).) A plaintiff must allege facts demonstrating or excusing compliance with the Act’s claims presentation requirement, otherwise the complaint is subject to a demurrer for failure to state a cause of action.”
Arrellano v. Sonoma Cnty. (N.D. Cal. 2024).
“”); Cal. Gov. Code § 950.6 (stating that, when a written claim for 11 money or damages for injury has been presented to the employing public entity, the public 12 employee who caused the injury cannot be sued except if the suit is brought within six months 13 after the claim is…”
Cal. Government Code § 950.6(b): 1 case
Salzer v. Barff, 2010 S.D. 96 (S.D. 2010).
“Cal. Gov.Code § 950.6(b); Fla. Stat. § 768.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.