(a)No mandated reporter shall be civilly or criminally liable for any report required or authorized by this article, and this immunity shall apply even if the mandated reporter acquired the knowledge or reasonable suspicion of child abuse or neglect outside of their professional capacity or outside the scope of their employment. Any other person reporting a known or suspected instance of child abuse or neglect shall not incur civil or criminal liability as a result of any report authorized by this article unless it can be proven that a false report was made and the person knew that the report was false or was made with reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the report, and any person who makes a report of child abuse or neglect known to
be false or with reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the report is liable for any damages caused. No person required to make a report pursuant to this article, nor any person taking photographs at their direction, shall incur any civil or criminal liability for taking photographs of a suspected victim of child abuse or neglect, or causing photographs to be taken of a suspected victim of child abuse or neglect, without parental consent, or for disseminating the photographs, images, or material with the reports required by this article. However, this section shall not be construed to grant immunity from this liability with respect to any other use of the photographs.
(b)Any person, who, pursuant to a request from a government agency investigating a report of suspected child abuse or neglect, provides the requesting agency with
access to the victim of a known or suspected instance of child abuse or neglect shall not incur civil or criminal liability as a result of providing that access.
(c)Any commercial computer technician, and any employer of any commercial computer technician, who, pursuant to a warrant from a law enforcement agency investigating a report of suspected child abuse or neglect, provides the law enforcement agency with a computer or computer component which contains possible evidence of a known or suspected instance of child abuse or neglect, shall not incur civil or criminal liability as a result of providing that computer or computer component to the law enforcement agency.
(d)Any person who, in good faith, provides information or assistance, including medical evaluations or
consultations, to an agency specified in Section 11165.9, in connection with a report, investigation, or legal intervention pursuant to a good faith report of child abuse or neglect under this article, shall not incur civil or criminal liability as a result of providing that information or assistance. This subdivision does not grant immunity from liability for an individual who is suspected of committing abuse or neglect of the child who is the subject of the report.
(e)(1)The Legislature finds that even though it has provided immunity from liability to persons required or authorized to make reports pursuant to this article, that immunity does not eliminate the possibility that actions may be brought against those persons based upon required or authorized reports. In order to further limit the financial hardship that
those persons may incur as a result of fulfilling their legal responsibilities, it is necessary that they not be unfairly burdened by legal fees incurred in defending those actions. Therefore, a mandated reporter may present a claim to the Department of General Services for reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in any action against that person on the basis of making a report required or authorized by this article if the court has dismissed the action upon a demurrer or motion for summary judgment made by that person, or if they prevail in the action. The Department of General Services shall allow that claim if the requirements of this subdivision are met, and the claim shall be paid from an appropriation to be made for that purpose. Attorney’s fees awarded pursuant to this section shall not exceed an hourly rate greater than the rate charged by the Attorney General of the State of
California at the time the award is made and shall not exceed an aggregate amount of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000).
(2)This subdivision shall not apply if a public entity has provided for the defense of the action pursuant to Section 995 of the Government Code.
(f)A court may award attorney’s fees and costs to a commercial film and photographic print processor when a suit is brought against the processor because of a disclosure mandated by this article and the court finds this suit to be frivolous.
Notes of Decisions
Hagberg v. California Fed. Bank FSB, 81 P.3d 244 (Cal. 2004).
· cites it 8× “For example, Penal Code section 11172, subdivision (a) (section 11172(a)), enacted in 1980, bars civil and criminal liability of statutorily mandated reporters of child abuse or neglect under the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act.”
Siam v. Kizilbash, 130 Cal. App. 4th 1563 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 11× “) The majority recognized the redundancy but was not convinced that it should affect the result: “Penal Code section 11172 was part of a comprehensive scheme in which the Legislature sought to increase substantially the reporting of a specific type of crime, but at the same time…”
Arce v. Childrens Hosp. Los Angeles, 211 Cal. App. 4th 1455 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 4× “Penal Code Section 11172 Provides the CHLA’s Defendants Immunity to Plaintiffs’ State Law Claims Only Plaintiffs have appealed four causes of action against CHLA and several of its employees.”
Marsh v. San Diego Cnty., 432 F. Supp. 2d 1035 (S.D. Cal. 2006).
· cites it 4× “Defendants Children’s Hospital and Chadwick further contend they are immune from suit under California Penal Code Section 11172 and the Witness Immunity Doctrine.”
Buckheit v. Dennis, 713 F. Supp. 2d 910 (N.D. Cal. 2010).
· cites it 7× “And for the first time in their reply brief, the Town and Officer Defendants also argue that California Penal Code § 11172 provides absolute immunity to the Officer Defendants based upon them status as mandatory reporters of suspected child abuse under state law.”
Begier v. Strom, 46 Cal. App. 4th 877 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 5× “(Pen. Code, § 11172, subd. (a).) [1] Second, in Family Code section 3027 the Legislature has authorized an award of sanctions against any party in a domestic relations proceeding who falsely accuses another party of child abuse.”
Dwight R. v. Christy B., 212 Cal. App. 4th 697 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “) Given their obligation under penalty of criminal prosecution to report all known and *708 reasonably suspected instances of child abuse or neglect, mandated reporters have unqualified, absolute immunity from criminal and civil liability “for any report required or authorized”…”
McMartin v. Child.'s Inst. Int'l, 212 Cal. App. 3d 1393 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 3× “(Pen. Code, § 11172, subd. (e).) Those subject to this mandatory reporting requirement are absolutely immune from civil or criminal liability for making such a report.”
Key v. Tyler, 34 Cal. App. 5th 505 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019).
“Such reports are covered by a specific statute ( Pen. Code, § 11172 ), which imposes liability for damages caused by submitting knowingly false reports.”
Watson v. Cnty. of Santa Clara, 468 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
· cites it 3× “Immunity of Mandatory Reporters The School District defendants argue that plaintiffs’ complaint should be dismissed with prejudice against them because they are all mandatory reporters under Cal.Penal Code § 11172 and, therefore, have absolute immunity from civil suit for (1)…”
People ex rel. Alzayat v. Hebb, 18 Cal. App. 5th 801 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017).
“( Pen. Code, § 11172, subd. (a).) Nonmandatory reporters are entitled to qualified immunity for making a false *822 report unless it is proven the reporter knew the report was false or made the report with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the report, in which case…”
Kenne v. Stennis, 230 Cal. App. 4th 953 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014).
“) 7 Penal Code section 11172, subdivision (a) provides, in pertinent part, “(a) No mandated reporter shall be civilly or criminally liable for any report required or authorized by this article, and this immunity shall apply even if the mandated reporter acquired the knowledge or…”
Cal. Penal Code § 11172(a): 10 cases
Siam v. Kizilbash, 130 Cal. App. 4th 1563 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005).
“) The majority recognized the redundancy but was not convinced that it should affect the result: “Penal Code section 11172 was part of a comprehensive scheme in which the Legislature sought to increase substantially the reporting of a specific type of crime, but at the same time…”
Hagberg v. California Fed. Bank FSB, 81 P.3d 244 (Cal. 2004).
“For example, Penal Code section 11172, subdivision (a) (section 11172(a)), enacted in 1980, bars civil and criminal liability of statutorily mandated reporters of child abuse or neglect under the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act.”
Marsh v. San Diego Cnty., 432 F. Supp. 2d 1035 (S.D. Cal. 2006).
“Defendants Children’s Hospital and Chadwick further contend they are immune from suit under California Penal Code Section 11172 and the Witness Immunity Doctrine.”
Watson v. Cnty. of Santa Clara, 468 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
“Immunity of Mandatory Reporters The School District defendants argue that plaintiffs’ complaint should be dismissed with prejudice against them because they are all mandatory reporters under Cal.Penal Code § 11172 and, therefore, have absolute immunity from civil suit for (1)…”
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.