25 Cal. App. 5th 948
Cal. Ct. App. 5th2018Background
- Plaintiff Mary Anselmo, a Pierce College volleyball player, was injured at Grossmont College’s beach volleyball courts when her knee struck a rock during an intercollegiate tournament.
- Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District owns and maintains the Grossmont campus and the volleyball facility where the injury occurred.
- Anselmo sued Grossmont for dangerous condition of public property (premises liability theory under Government Code § 835) after amending earlier negligence-based claims.
- Grossmont demurred asserting field trip/excursion immunity under title 5, § 55220 (community college counterpart to Education Code § 35330).
- Trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend; judgment for Grossmont entered and Anselmo appealed.
- Court of Appeal reversed: held § 55220 immunity did not cover a visiting team member injured on the host’s premises during intercollegiate competition; host district owes duty to visiting players to avoid increasing sport-inherent risks.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 55220 field trip/excursion immunity bars Anselmo's claim | § 55220 does not apply because Grossmont was the host providing and maintaining the athletic facility where the dangerous condition existed | § 55220 shields the district from liability for injuries occurring during educational/extracurricular "field trips" or excursions, including athletic events involving visiting teams | Reversed: § 55220 immunity does not apply to a host district’s liability for dangerous conditions of its facility injuring visiting team members |
| Whether Grossmont "conducted" the field trip such that immunity applies | Grossmont did not conduct Pierce College’s trip; Pierce controlled transportation and participation; Grossmont only provided the facility | Immunity applies because the event occurred during an instructional/extracurricular activity and falls within the field trip/excursion provision | Held: Grossmont did not "conduct" the trip; hosting an intercollegiate match and providing facilities is distinct from conducting a field trip and does not trigger § 55220 |
Key Cases Cited
- Avila v. Citrus Community College District, 38 Cal.4th 148 (2006) (host college owes duty to avoid increasing risks inherent in intercollegiate sports to both home and visiting players)
- Sanchez v. San Diego County Office of Education, 182 Cal.App.4th 1580 (2010) (field trip/excursion immunity applies to entities that conduct or substantially participate in trips; framework for § 55220 analysis)
- Barnhart v. Cabrillo Community College, 76 Cal.App.4th 818 (1999) (immunity applied where district organized/transported students to athletic event)
- Myricks v. Lynwood Unified School District, 74 Cal.App.4th 231 (1999) (field trip immunity where district provided transportation and control for athletic travel)
- Roe ex rel. Callahan v. Gustine Unified School District, 678 F.Supp.2d 1008 (E.D. Cal. 2009) (federal case applying field trip immunity to jointly conducted sports camp)