Ciraulo v. City of Newport Beach
Filed
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
JOSEPH CIRAULO et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, Defendant and Respondent. | G035793 (Super. Ct. No. 05CC02433) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Mary Fingal Erickson, Judge. Affirmed.
Kevin E. Monson for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
Robin L. Clauson, City Attorney, and Daniel K. Ohl, Deputy City Attorney; Rutan & Tucker and Philip D. Kohn, for Defendant and Respondent.
Joseph and Carole Ciraulo appeal from a judgment dismissing the City of Newport Beach (the City) from their lawsuit, which followed the court's order sustaining the City's demurrer without leave to amend. The Ciraulos argue the court erroneously determined the City was immunized from its alleged liability by Government Code section 818.8[1], and otherwise contend their cause of action was sufficient to withstand the City's demurrer. We conclude the court did not err in applying the immunity statute, and affirm the judgment on that basis.[2]
* * *
The Ciraulos alleged a cause of action called â€
