California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from City of Fresno v. Superior Court, 104 Cal.App.3d 25, 163 Cal.Rptr. 807 (Cal. App. 1980):
[104 Cal.App.3d 32] A court does not relieve a potential plaintiff of the claim requirements of section 945.4, as a matter of course; plaintiff must first demonstrate two essentials by a preponderance of the evidence (Shaddox v. Melcher (1969) 270 Cal.App.2d 598, 601-602, 76 Cal.Rptr. 80). First, it must be shown that the section 911.4 application was presented within a reasonable time, and second, that the failure to file a timely claim was due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. (Tammen v. County of San Diego (1967) 66 Cal.2d 468, 474, 58 Cal.Rptr. 249, 426 P.2d 753.)
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.