Anyone denied a dredge permit in California should

Oakview2

Silver Member
Feb 4, 2012
2,807
3,348
Prather CA
Detector(s) used
Whites GMT
Primary Interest:
Other
Thanks to Elder Miner for the link.

HIT CA WITH A TORT CLAIM - FOR MONEY DAMAGES

1. Introduction
In California, before you may sue a public entity (a state, county or local governmental entity) or a government employee for money damages, you must first file a claim meeting the requirements of the California Tort Claims Act. California Government (Gov’t) Code sections 810-996.6. With very limited exceptions, no lawsuit for money damages may be brought against a governmental entity unless a written claim has been properly filed within the six-month time limit. So, even if you are injured by the government and do not currently intend to sue, you should still consider filing a claim in order to protect your rights and to keep your options open.
The California Tort Claims Act sets out the procedures you must follow when filing a claim against the government for money damages. This memo describes the most significant parts of the Act. This memo is based on the laws in effect at the date of its writing, which are, of course, subject to change. Also, depending on the type of action you are bringing, other procedures and time lines may apply. We recommend that you talk to an attorney who specializes in the relevant area of law (for example, personal injury or medical malpractice) to get more specific information about your potential claims and time lines.
2. When a claim is necessary
You might choose to sue the government for a variety of reasons. Some reasons might be that a governmental entity has violated your rights, or it is responsible for a death, physical injury, or property damage. If the government injures you, this injury is called a "tort." The person filing the "tort claim," usually the injured person is called the "claimant." In most cases, you, as the claimant, must file a tort claim if you are trying to get money or "damages" from the governmental entity. Gov't Code sections 905, 905.2.
3. Who may file a claim
You may file a claim against a governmental entity on your own behalf or on behalf of someone else who was injured. Gov't Code sections 910, 910.2. An "injury" includes not only physical injury, but also damage to personal property (possessions) and violations of protected rights.
4. How to file a claim
You can file a claim against a county or local governmental entity or employee directly with the entity's governing board or clerk. You may deliver the claim in person or by mail. Gov't Code section 915(a).
You can file a claim against the state or a state agency or employee with the State Board of Control (SBC), by delivering it to any local SBC office or by mailing it to the main office. Gov't Code section 915(b). The address for the main SBC office in Sacramento is:
State Board of Control
Government Claims Branch
P.O. Box 3035
Sacramento, CA 95812-3035.
(916) 323-3564 (voice)
(916) 323-5768 (fax)
You can ask for a claim form by calling the SBC toll-free number
1-800-955-0045, or you can download it off the SBC web cite at
[url]http://www.boc.ca.gov/claims/howtofile.aspx[/URL].
Claim form link
[url]http://www.boc.ca.gov/docs/forms/claims/GCClaimForm.pdf[/URL]
If you deliver the claim in person, the filing date is the delivery date. If you mail the claim, the filing date is the mailing date - not the date the entity receives the claim.
If you decide to mail a claim, we recommend that you mail it certified mail with return receipt requested. Some governmental entities have their own claim forms. You may want to contact them to obtain such a form. So long as you include all the required information (see below), however, it is not necessary that you use the entity’s particular form.
5. Contents of the claim
According to section 910 of the Government Code, a claim against a governmental entity must contain the following:
A. Your name (the claimant's name) and post office address;
B. The post office address where you want to receive notices;
C. The date, place, and circumstances of the occurrence giving rise to the claim (that is, describe what happened and how you were injured);
D. A general description of the injury, damage, or loss;
E. The name(s) of the government employee(s) causing the injury, if known;
F If the amount is less than $10,000, the dollar amount claimed (including an estimate of future injury) and the basis for computing the amount; and
G. If the amount is greater than $10,000, you do not have to set out a specific amount on the claim form. You must, however, indicate whether the case would be a "limited civil case." Gov’t Code section 910(f) and California Civil Code of Procedure sections 85, 86.
Whether a case is a "limited civil case" depends on the amount of money damages you are asking for and what else you are asking the governmental entity to do. Generally, a case is a limited civil case if the amount of money you are seeking is less than $25,000 (not including reasonable attorney fees and costs) and you are not asking for any of the following:

A permanent injunction (that is, a court order granted after a final hearing which commands or prevents the governmental entity from taking the action complained about);
A determination of title to real property;
Enforcement of an order under the Family Code; or
Declaratory relief (asking the court to make a statement which establishes the rights and other legal relations of the parties without ordering enforcement), except as is allowed by Code of Civil Procedure section 86.
Code of Civil Procedure section 580.
6. Timelines
The California Tort Claims Act sets out strict timelines that you must follow when filing a claim against a governmental entity. You must file a claim for personal injury (that is, one based on death, physical injury, or damage to personal property) within six months of the date of the injury. Gov't Code section 911.2.
If you did not know the reason for filing the claim at the time of injury (for example, in some medical malpractice cases), the six-month time period begins at the point when you became aware, or should have become aware, of the reason. See, for example, Whitfield v. Roth (1974) 10 C.3d 874, 112 Cal Rptr 540.
7. Late claims
Sometimes a claimant waits longer than six months to file a personal injury claim. The law treats two types of claims differently: claims that are simply filed late and claims that are filed late, but are accompanied by an "application for late filing."
If you do not file a claim for personal injury within six months of the date you were injured, you may lose the chance to file a lawsuit unless you write to the governmental entity and "apply" to be allowed to file a late claim. Gov't Code section 911.4(a). In your letter, you must state the reason(s) that you did not file the claim within six months from the date of injury, and you must include an actual claim. Gov't Code section 911.4(b). There are four valid reasons for a late claim:

Mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect;
Minority (the claimant was a minor during the entire six month period);
Physical or mental incapacity; and
Death of the claimant.
(See Gov't Code section 911.6(b))
You must write to the public entity within a reasonable time not to exceed one year from the date of the injury to apply for leave to file late. Gov't Code section 911.4(b).) The "reasonableness" of the delay is determined on a case-by-case basis, and in any given case even a short delay may be considered unreasonable. You should therefore apply for leave to file a late claim as soon as possible.
8. What happens to the claim once it is filed.
After you file a claim, the board must respond (allow or reject the claim in whole or in part) within 45 days. If the board does not respond, the claim is treated as rejected on the 45th day. Gov't Code sections 912.6(a), 912.4©.
9. Suing the governmental entity if the claim is rejected
The board must notify you of its action on the claim (or its rejection through failure to act). If the board rejects the claim in whole or in part, you have six months from the date the notification is mailed to file a lawsuit against the governmental entity. Gov't Code sections 913, 945.6(a)(1).
If the board fails to notify you of its action (or inaction), such failure is treated as a rejection of the claim (as discussed above) and you have two years from the date of the injury to file suit. Gov't Code section 945.6(a)(2).



 

More from Elder Miner

Just my humble opinion, but CA pro-suction dredge litigants attorneys went about it wrong. All the briefs I read, were overloaded with peripheral facts, regulation, statutes & legislation that supported but diluted the effectiveness of sticking to a very few critical points, that should have clinched a decision or ruling in pro-suction dredge litigants favor. For that very reason, (IMHO), the CA District Federal court refused to hear it. As, it appeared like a 20 foot long dumpster load, containing everything but the kitchen sink

One, 2 or 3 concise points presented in a “one-shot-one-kill”, 2 shots - 2 kills, 3 shots - 3 kills manner would have been much more effective. Instead, briefs were full of 40 pages of issues, so much so - they diluted their own effectiveness - like shooting a 12 gauge shotgun shell loaded with a 1000 sand particles, at a target ½ mile away. Which, might appear & sound good, but certainly will have no lethal effect.

Valid unpatented mining claims can only be initiated on Federal lands (USFS-BLM lands open to mineral entry). California law provides for & conforms to Federal law.

http://www.leginfo.c...&file=3900-3924

New 49’ers - operating suction dredges - on valid placer claims - were operating under both Federal & CA State law, including a Federal permit (USFS approved Plan of Operation).

Impart, the point should have been driven home, Federal Statutes provide the authority to suction dredge mine placer gold on valid unpatented mining claims. An approved USFS Plan of operation (which - the New 49’ers had) is the Federal “permit” to do so. The State of California - has not lawful authority to over-ride - circumscribe, delay or deny an operators “right” to operate under a Federal permit.

The term “vested mining right” includes both a right established by use, as well as a right established by permit. (See; TransOceanic Oil Corporation v. Santa Barbara (1948) 85 Cal.App.2d 776; Avco Community Developers, Inc. v. South Coast Regional Comm’n. (1976) 17 Cal.3d 785, 790

“A permit becomes a vested property right where the permittee has incurred substantial liabilities and performed substantial work in reliance on the permit“; Goat Hill Tavern v. City of Costa Mesa (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1519; Hansen Bros. Enterprises v. Board of Supervisors of Nevada County (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533 (“Hansen”).)

As an example - federal law allows you to buy agricultural property, to plant apple trees on the property , then grow & harvest those apples, for your own economic benefit (profit). California law allows the same. Except, here - California law - will not allow you to “harvest” the apples. Which, unconstitutionally “takes” all economic benefit from you. The only thing a valid mining claim owner “owns”, are the locatable minerals within it, and the right to mine them, under reasonable regulation. Take that, and you take everything.

The California Constitution provides, "Private property may be taken or damaged for public use only when just compensation ... has first been paid to, or into court for, the owner." (Cal. Const., art. I, § 19.)

The California Statehood Admission Act (Sec. 3) expressly provides; “…said State of California is admitted into the Union upon the express condition that the people of said State, through their legislature or otherwise, shall never interfere with the primary disposal of the public lands within its limits, and shall pass no law and do no act whereby the title of the United States to, and right to dispose of, the same shall be impaired or questioned…”.

Absent consent or cession a State undoubtedly retains jurisdiction over federal lands within its territory, but Congress equally surely retains the power to enact legislation respecting those lands pursuant to the Property Clause. And when Congress so acts, the federal legislation necessarily overrides conflicting state laws under the Supremacy Clause. California Coastal Comm 'n v. Granite Rock, 480 U.S. 572, 581, 107 S. Ct 1419,94 L.Ed.2d 577 (1987).

The policies contained in FLPMA explicitly state that the management, protection, disposition and disposal/withdrawal of federal lands is vested in the federal government and not with the state. In short, a state cannot dictate to the federal government, or a federal agency what specific land uses are or are not allowed on federal lands.43 U.S.C. 1712©(9
 
 
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top