Immunity Bill’s Defeat Is Blow to Beach Cities

SACRAMENTO —  In a setback for California coastal cities, the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday rejected a bill that would have reversed a 1982 appellate court ruling that triggered scores of multimillion-dollar lawsuits over beach injuries.

With most members abstaining, the committee voted 3 to 1 against a bill by state Sen. Marian Bergeson (R-Newport Beach) that would have reversed the court ruling and restored an immunity that California public entities had enjoyed since 1962--immunity from liability for injuries resulting from natural conditions at beaches and other recreational areas.

$6-Million Verdict

Bergeson acknowledged that the vote makes it all but impossible “to get a bill through this year,” but she said the issue “is too important to just drop.”

Bergeson’s bill had been inspired by a $6-million Orange County Superior Court verdict last year against the City of Newport Beach in a lawsuit brought by John Taylor of Claremont, who became a quadriplegic after diving into shallow water and striking his head on a sandbar.

That case, which the city is appealing, relied on the 1982 3rd District Court of Appeal ruling in the drowning of Theresa Gonzales, which held that the City of San Diego could be held responsible for her death.

Essentially, the justices said in the Gonzales case that public entities are not immune from liability for injuries in areas where improvements had been made and municipal services such as police and lifeguards have been provided.

But Bergeson argued before the committee Tuesday that the Gonzales decision is at odds with what the Legislature intended when it granted the natural condition immunity to governments, and it is inconsistent with several earlier court rulings.

Bergeson had made a number of minor amendments to her bill during the past week, trying to overcome objections. But she picked up little support.

Sen. Barry Keene (D-Benicia), expressing what appeared to be the committee’s general feeling, said there must be a way to relieve cities of responsibility for injuries over which they have no control, without excusing them for negligence.

“But this is not that bill,” he said.

“It appears to me that both the cities and the trial lawyers need to get together and write a bill,” Keene added.

Trial Lawyers Assn.

The California Trial Lawyers Assn., the bill’s chief opponent, had pointed to the Newport Beach case over the paralyzing injury to Taylor with the same conviction as had supporters of Bergeson’s bill.

But while supporters say the verdict is an example of a city being ordered to pay a huge judgment for an unfortunate injury in which a natural force and the victim himself are the true culprits, the trial lawyers say that Newport Beach was justly held responsible for Taylor’s injuries.

Peter Hinton, a Walnut Creek attorney who testified at Tuesday’s hearing, said there were 33 spinal cord injuries the same year that Taylor was injured and 126 in the preceding five years in Newport Beach.

“I’d be interested to know if there is a (warning) sign posted there today,” said Hinton.

“I don’t think we want to go back to the medieval notion that the king can do no wrong,” Hinton said after the hearing.

The inconsistency among cities with regard to warning signs about beach hazards and dangers was a key issue in the Taylor case. Newport Beach had not posted warnings of sand movement that creates invisible sandbars, then minutes or hours later moves them to other locations.

English, Spanish Signs

But neighboring Huntington Beach did post such signs, in English and Spanish, calling attention to a number of dangers at the beach.

Bergeson’s bill was supported by the California League of Cities, Atty. Gen. John Van de Kamp and numerous cities and counties. She also picked up a last-minute personal endorsement from Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley. And a spokesman for Gov. George Deukmejian, while stopping short of an endorsement, acknowledged there were strong indications he too supported the measure.

But only Sen. Ed Davis (R-Valencia) voted for the bill in committee Tuesday.

Committee Chairman Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward) and Sens. Milton Marks (R-San Francisco) and Nicholas Petris (D-Oakland) voted against the bill, while the rest of the nine-member committee either missed the vote or abstained.

Lockyer, however, ordered that the vote not be recorded in the Senate Journal at all after Bergeson asked that the bill be kept alive for possible reconsideration.

Although chances of reviving the measure this year are slim, Bergeson said she intends to meet soon with several city attorneys to see if there is a compromise approach Judiciary Committee members will find more acceptable.

Hinton said it is doubtful that Bergeson can write a bill addressing the issue that the Trial Lawyers Assn. would support.