California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Rason v. Santa Barbara City Housing Authority, 201 Cal.App.3d 817, 247 Cal.Rptr. 492 (Cal. App. 1988):
Normally a complaint for damages against a public entity may not be filed until the public entity acts on a timely claim or, where the claim was not timely and an application for leave to present a late claim is denied, until a court grants the claimant relief from the requirements of the Claims Act. ( 945.4, 946.6.) Where, however, the claimant disputes the public entity's determination of untimeliness, the claimant must file a complaint for damages in order to raise this issue. (Toscano v. County of Los Angeles, supra, 92 Cal.App.3d at pp. 782-783, 155 Cal.Rptr. 146; Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 171, 177, 217 Cal.Rptr. 69.) A trial court hearing a section 946.6 petition cannot consider whether a claim was timely, because that issue is not within the scope of the proceeding. ( Toscano v. County of Los Angeles, supra, 92 Cal.App.3d at p. 782, 155 Cal.Rptr. 146; 946.6, subd. (c).) The Rasons therefore could not raise the issue of timeliness through the late claim procedure. 4
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.