Lane v. Dept. of Corrections
Court review a judgment of dismissal after demurrer, regarding the " Writ of Mandamus . . . and Motion for Summary Judgment" filed in 2005 in superior court by plaintiff and appellant Michael Anthony Lane (a California prison inmate). In his pleading (the complaint), Lane seeks relief against respondents California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (the Department) and Jeanne S. Woodford (together defendants) for their alleged mishandling of his claims regarding the sum of $797.60, representing reimbursement of amounts taken from his inmate trust account at another prison, to satisfy then - existing restitution orders, between 1995 and 2002. Previously, in 2004, Lane obtained a small claims court judgment in that amount, which was honored by defendants. (Lane v. Dept. of Corrections (Super. Ct. San Diego County, 2004, No. SC157217).)
The trial court sustained without leave to amend defendants' demurrer, stating that "plaintiff's complaint seeks to overturn the judgment of the small claims court ...... and as such it is specifically barred by Code of Civil Procedure section 116.710, subdivision (a). " Other grounds of demurrer were not reached and since no possibility of amendment to cure the defect existed, the matter was dismissed.
Plaintiff appeals, contending the superior court should have jurisdiction over the complaint, because his complaint could be considered to be enforcement of a postjudgment order, or the superior court should have recognized that the small claims court could have considered and ruled upon plaintiff's increased damages requests (for punitive damages), such that the small claims judgment should have been vacated pursuant to his motion. Further, plaintiff complains that the defendants failed to comply adequately with certain administrative procedures for obtaining a written release (regarding lost personal property appeals) from plaintiff. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 15, S 3084.7, subd. (e).)
Court agree with the trial court that the complaint fails to state any cognizable claim for relief and it is barred by section 116.710, subdivision (a). The demurrer was properly sustained without leave to amend.
Comments on Lane v. Dept. of Corrections