More than a year after catastrophic flooding in southeastern San Diego forced thousands of people from their homes, the sprawling litigation many of them filed against the city is advancing and taking shape.
After the city tried to reduce the legal claims against it over its management of stormwater infrastructure in southeastern San Diego, a Vista judge ruled last week that only one claim would be thrown out and another five would proceed for now.
The city is currently facing dozens of lawsuits from more than 1,900 residents whose homes were damaged by the catastrophic flooding in January 2024, which largely impacted underserved communities along the Chollas Creek watershed.
One complaint filed last May — now one of the lead lawsuits in the matter — lists six causes of action against the city, ranging from negligence to creation of a dangerous condition of public property.
In mid-January, the city asked the judge to dismiss three of those. Last week, Judge Earl Maas III ruled to dismiss only the one that alleged that city employees were negligent in maintaining, monitoring and managing the stormwater channels.
“You win some, you lose some,” said Evan Walker, one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers. “This won’t have much of an impact at all on the case,” Walker said.
While the claim of negligence was focused on city employees, the lawsuit also contends that the city’s alleged failure to maintain the storm channels, “or the negligent or wrongful conduct of Defendants’ employee(s) acting within the scope of employment,” created a dangerous condition of public property.
The city also sought to throw out a cause of action on the basis of trespass, which argued that mismanagement of stormwater infrastructure let floodwaters enter and damage residents’ homes unlawfully, and an allegation that the city misused its stormwater tax revenue, failing to use it to clean and maintain storm channels.
On Thursday, Judge Maas said in a status conference that it’s simply “too early” to rule out those two causes of action.
“The issue will need to be re-examined in the face of later pleadings, or through summary judgment,” he wrote in an earlier minute order on the question, saying those two causes of action should proceed to discovery.
The city declined to comment, saying it is unable to comment on pending litigation.
The filed lawsuits demand millions of dollars in damages from the city. But it’s not the first time the city has been pressed to confront its stormwater infrastructure, which residents say has been crumbling for years.
In 2018, several residents sued the city following flooding that destroyed their homes. They settled for just over $200,000, but the agreement didn’t require the city to make improvements to the flood channel.
A group of attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the current lawsuits has been coordinating to ensure the litigation is heard by the same judge and follows a similar timeline. The consolidated litigation has been reassigned three times.
At Thursday’s status conference, lawyers for both sides came together to discuss where the litigation stands, including the process of ensuring that all related lawsuits are assigned to Maas.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers raised concerns about the cases being heard in North County, since the flooding happened in the city of San Diego, mainly in the neighborhoods of Southcrest, Shelltown and Logan Heights. They said it could be difficult for plaintiffs to travel to the North County Courthouse in Vista.
In response, Maas said he anticipates all the cases would be tried in downtown San Diego.
The next status conference is scheduled for March 27.
Originally Published:
