Thursday, December 18, 2025
Page 3
Court of Appeal:
Filing Governmental Claim in Wrong City Was ‘Clerical’ Error
By a MetNews Staff Writer
A judge did not abuse his discretion in permitting the parents of a man fatally shot by police to file a late claim against a governmental entity, Div. Two of the Fourth District Court of Appeal has determined, saying that while it was a “serious” error on the part of a law firm to send papers to the wrong city, it was not an “unreasonable” one.
Parents Shannon Luellen and Gary Blackwell timely filed claims pursuant to the Government Claims Act—a prerequisite to bringing suit—but directed them to the City of Riverside, rather than the City of Beaumont. The claims were received by Riverside on June 13, 2023, but letters of rejection were not mailed until July 12, 2023, two days before the six-month filing deadline, and were received on July 18.
The opinion relates that a paralegal downloaded the City of Riverside claim form and filed it electronically, intimating that she thought that it was applicable to all cities within the County of Riverside. Beaumont is located in that county.
City Denies Leave
Beaumont denied an application to file a late claim; Riverside Superior Court Judge Joshua Andrew Knight on March 21, 2024, granted relief from the failure to file timely claims, acting pursuant to Government Code §946.6; the City of Beaumont purported to appeal.
Acting Presiding Justice Joanne Motoike authored the unpublished opinion, filed Tuesday, saying that the granting of relief under that section is nonappealable. But the panel construed the supposed appeal as a writ petition, and proceeded to deny it, without discussing whether the matter might be moot given that litigation has moved on to federal court and dismissal, pursuant to a settlement, is in the offing.
Addressing the merits, Motoike wrote that relief is mandatory under §946.6 where an application to file a late claim is timely made and is denied and where the “failure to present the claim was through mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” She said that “[w]hile not every mistake is excusable, the determining factor is whether the mistake was reasonable.”
Location Was Known
The City of Beaumont agreed that a mistake had been made but argued that relief was precluded because that mistake was unreasonable given that the plaintiffs knew that their son was killed in Beaumont by police officers employed there. Rejecting that position, the justice declared:
“The nature of the mistake in this case is clerical.”
She explained:
“The law clerk’s mistake in downloading a claim form for the City of Riverside, while serious, is reasonable and excusable, especially considering the incident occurred in Riverside County. Counsel’s mistake in not looking more closely at the claim forms before instructing his assistant to file them is also serious. However, a serious mistake is not necessarily unreasonable.”
It is contended by the plaintiffs that six members of the Beaumont Police Department displayed “reckless and unreasonable use of force to detain Garrett Blackwell,” 19, resulting in his death from six bullets during a Jan. 14, 2023, after-midnight encounter following a car-chase.
The case is City of Beaumont v. Superior Court, G064543.
Luellen and Blackwell were represented by Daniel Tapetillo of the downtown Los Angeles firm of Geragos & Geragos. Acting for the city was Shaun M. Murphy of the Palm Springs firm of Slovak Baron Empey Murphy & Pinkney LLP.
Federal Court Litigation
Litigation was brought by Luellen and Blackwell in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, as Motoike noted (observing that treating the purported appeal as a writ petition is appropriate because “[n]o federal court can review the order granting section 946.6 relief”).
There has been no action in the Riverside Superior Court case since April 5, 2024, when the March 21 order granting relief was entered, other than a May 7, 2024 sua sponte order removing the confidential status of the proceedings.
Representing the parents in the federal case, filed April 22, 2024—the month after Knight ruled that a late-claim could be filed—are Tapetillo, along with Kimberly Casper, of Geragos & Geragos.
Last Oct. 21, Chief Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson, noting that a conditional settlement has been reached, subject to approval by the Beaumont City Council, ordered:
“The parties shall file any settlement documents and a Stipulation of Dismissal by no later than December 22, 2025.”
There are no later-filed documents.
Copyright 2025, Metropolitan News Company