Legal Opinion

Alliance Financial v. City & County of San Francisco

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 5, 1998No. A076797PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

STEIN, J.

In this opinion we are required to construe the claims presentation provisions of the California Tort Claims Act (Gov. Code, § 900 et seq.) as they apply to an action seeking payment for money due on a contract. We hold that the claims requirements apply to contract actions, including actions such as this. We also find that if the claimant provides written notification to the public entity that an actionable claim exists and that the failure to resolve it may result in litigation, the public entity may not remain silent and later defend on the grounds that the claimant failed…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Loehr v. Ventura County Community College DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  2. Coleman v. DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ADMININISTRATIONCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Phillips v. Desert Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Dilts v. Cantua Elementary School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
  5. Foster v. McFaddenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. City of Stockton v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Del Real v. City of RiversideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  3. Lozada v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  4. Hart v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  5. California School Employees Ass'n v. Governing Board of South Orange County Community College DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API