Varshock v. Department of Forestry
194 Cal. App. 4th 635
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Harris Ranch wildfire in San Diego County (Oct–Nov 2007) destroyed thousands of acres and structures; Varshocks evacuated to their mobilehome on the property; Thomas and Richard followed after Dianne had left with Thomas and Richard in separate vehicles.
- Firefighters responded to the Harris Ranch fire and proceeded toward the Varshocks’ property in a fire engine; the engine backed out as conditions worsened; Thomas and Richard entered the engine after the ATV they were with broke down.
- Engine backed toward the property, flames intensified, windows shattered, andThomas died while unable to exit; Richard and the firefighters were seriously burned but survived.
- Firefighters’ actions occurred at the scene while actively fighting the fire; the engine’s involvement and alleged negligent operation are central to the injuries.
- CAL-FIRE moved for summary judgment claiming immunity under Gov. Code § 850.4; Varshocks claimed Vehicle Code § 17001 exception could apply; trial court granted summary judgment for CAL-FIRE, and the court of appeal affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interplay of §850.4 immunity and §17001 exception | 17001 applies to tortious motor-vehicle operation at the scene | Immunity applies to on-scene firefighting; 17001 is a narrow exception | Immunity prevails; 17001 does not negate on-scene injuries |
| Did CAL-FIRE meet its initial burden on summary judgment | CAL-FIRE failed to negate §17001 and to provide adequate undisputed facts | Evidence showed immunity and negated §17001 | Yes; initial burden satisfied |
| Are there triable issues of material fact precluding summary judgment | There are disputed facts about the fire captain’s conduct | Record shows at-scene firefighting actions; no triable issues | No triable issues; summary judgment proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Colapinto v. County of Riverside, 230 Cal.App.3d 147 (1991) (Colapinto: §850.4 immunity at scene when used to fight a fire)
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Garamendi, 32 Cal.4th 1029 (2004) (Legislative intent and statutory construction guidance)
- Arias v. Superior Court, 46 Cal.4th 969 (2009) (Literal construction not controlling when it frustrates purpose)
- Lungren v. Deukmejian, 45 Cal.3d 727 (1988) (Exceptions must be strictly construed; immunity general rule)
- City of Poway v. City of San Diego, 229 Cal.App.3d 847 (1991) (Statutes construed to harmonize purpose and language)
- City and County of San Francisco v. Superior Court, 160 Cal.App.3d 837 (1984) (Firefighting decisions should not be deterred by liability)