## Facts

- Civic Partners Stockton, LLC entered redevelopment agreements with the City of Stockton’s redevelopment agency to rehabilitate the Hotel Stockton and build an adjacent cinema.
- The City later leased upper floors of the hotel from Civic for office space but repudiated the lease within months.
- The redevelopment agency entered an agreement with another developer that conflicted with Civic’s redevelopment agreement.
- Civic sued the City and the redevelopment agency for money or damages on contract-based and related theories.
- Before filing suit, Civic did not present a written claim to either public entity under the Government Code claim-presentation statutes.

## Issues

1. Whether the Government Code claim-presentation requirements apply to breach of contract causes of action seeking money or damages against local public entities.
2. Whether a local public entity forfeits the claim-presentation defense by failing to raise it in earlier demurrers and asserting it only in a later demurrer.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court held that Government Code sections 905 and 945.4 apply to contract claims for money or damages against local public entities, absent a statutory exception.
- The Court held the City and redevelopment agency did not forfeit the defense by omitting it from earlier demurrers and raising it against the second amended complaint.
- The Court affirmed (with modifications) the judgment directing the trial court to sustain the demurrer based on failure to comply with claim presentation.

## Legal Principles

- Government Code section 905’s requirement that “all claims for money or damages” be presented before suit includes contract claims as well as tort claims, unless expressly excluded by statute.
- Government Code section 945.4 bars a lawsuit for money or damages against a public entity unless a written claim has been presented and acted upon (or deemed rejected).
- Failure to present a timely claim bars the action against the public entity.
- Failure to plead facts showing (or excusing) compliance with the claim-presentation requirement subjects the complaint to general demurrer.
- A public entity may raise noncompliance with the claim-presentation statutes in a later demurrer; omission from earlier demurrers does not, by itself, preclude assertion of the defense.

## Conclusion

The court required claim presentation for contract damages actions against local public entities and held that noncompliance is a bar that may be asserted by demurrer even if not raised at the earliest pleading stage, warranting dismissal where compliance cannot be alleged.


City of Stockton v. Superior Court, 42 Cal. 4th 730, 171 P.3d 20 (Cal. 2007)