TSA Agent Death Lawsuit

1 Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Decedent, Gerardo Ismael Hernandez, and for causes of
2 actions against Defendants, LOS ANGELES WORLD AIRPORTS, CITY OF LOS
3 ANGELES, THE AIRPORT POLICE AT LOS ANGELES, LOS ANGELES POLICE
4 DEPARTMENT, LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, and
5 DOES 1-100, and each of them, and hereby complain and allege as follows:
6 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
7 1. Plaintiff, Ana Z. Machuca ("Plaintiff1 or "Plaintiffs") is the surviving wife of
8 decedent Gerardo Ismael Hernandez, and at all times relevant herein was a resident of the
9 County of Los Angeles, State of California.
10 2. Plaintiffs, Luis G. Hernandez and Stephanie M. Hernandez ("Plaintiff' or
11 "Plaintiffs"), by and through their Guardian Ad Litem, Ana Z. Machuca, are the surviving
o 12 children of decedent Gerardo Ismael Hernandez, and at all times relevant herein were
o
LU
in
£ t*-
«D 13 residents of the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
T- O
_ o
O % ®
0_ CTJ <
14 3. Decedent, Gerardo Ismael Hernandez ("Decedent"), a Transportation Safety
>w o
•= & ® 15 Officer, was shot multiple times and subsequently died on the morning of November 1,
<0 0- •5
3
< 3< 16 2013. Gerardo Ismael Hernandez was the husband of Plaintiff, Ana Z. Machuca and father
o 3 17 of Plaintiffs, Luis G. Hernandez and Stephanie M. Hernandez.
o
'
it
00
18 4. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendant, Los
19 Angeles World Airports ("LAWA"), at all times relevant herein, was and is a governmental
20 and public entity, and/or a municipal corporation or political subdivision within the State of
21 California, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, United
22 States.
23 5. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendant, City
24 of Los Angeles ("City of LA" or "City"), at all times relevant herein was and is a
25 governmental and public entity, and/or a municipal corporation or political subdivision within
26 the State of California, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California,
27 United States.
28 ///
2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

1 6. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendant, Airport
2 Police at Los Angeles ("LAWAPD" or "LAXPD"), at all times relevant herein, was and is a
5 United States.
6 Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendant, Los
7 Angeles Police Department ("LAPD"), at all times relevant herein, was and is a
10 United States.
11 8. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendant, Los
& 12 Angeles Fire Department ("LAFD"), at all times relevant herein, was and is a governmental
Q
u.
£ 13 and public entity, and/or a municipal corporation or political subdivision within the State of
T— O
2 "§ < 14 California, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, United
5w o
3 Is j§ 15 States.
<D CL "55
311 16 g Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendant,
53 17 County of Los Angeles ("County of LA" or "County"), at all times relevant herein, was and
o
00
18 is a governmental and public entity, and/or a municipal corporation or political subdivision
19 within the State of California, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of
20 California, United States.
21 10. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that DOES 1 and 2
22 were LAWA, City, LAWAPD, LAXPD, LAPD, and/or County officers/agents/employees
23 assigned to Terminal 3 of LAX and that said Doe Defendants left their positions in the
24 terminal without calling for replacement officers, leaving the terminal without adequate
25 coverage, in violation of Los Angeles World Airports', City of Los Angeles', The Airport
26 Police at Los Angeles', the Los Angeles Police Department's, and the County of Los
27 Angeles' instructions, orders, directions, policies and procedures which state that officers
28 assigned to the terminals must inform supervisors when they want to take a break and that

1 "absent exigent circumstances, (the units) shall not leave the assigned terminal area without
2 prior authorization and a relief unit." DOES1 and 2, in doing the things alleged herein, were
3 acting within the course and scope of that employment and with the permission and consent
4 of each of their co-Defendants. Their actions and/or inactions caused injury to Plaintiffs.
5 11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that DOES 3 through
6 50 are Defendants', Los Angeles World Airports', City of Los Angeles', the Airport Police at
7 Los Angeles', Los Angeles Police Department's, Los Angeles Fire Department's, and
8 County of Los Angeles', agents, partners, co-conspirators, and/or employees, and in doing
9 the things alleged herein, were acting within the course and scope of that agency,
10 partnership, conspiracy, and/or employment and with the permission and consent of each
11 of their co-Defendants failed to follow Defendants' instructions, directions, procedures, and
b 12 policies. Their actions and/or inactions caused injury to Plaintiffs.

o
Ll_
13 12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that DOES 51 through
•e- O
- O
9 «^
Q- ro < 14 75 are Defendants', Los Angeles World Airports', City of Los Angeles', the Airport Police at
> W o
•J to © 15 Los Angeles', Los Angeles Police Department's, Los Angeles Fire Department's, and
O CL •5
3*
3< 16 County of Los Angeles', contractors, subcontractors, and/or vendors, and in doing the things
0 §
o 3 17 alleged herein, were acting within the course and scope of that agency, partnership,
o
••tf-
CO
18 conspiracy, and/or contractual relationship and with the permission and consent of each of
19 their co-Defendants failed to follow Defendants' instructions, orders, directions, procedures,
20 and policies. Their actions and/or inactions caused injury to Plaintiffs.
21 13. The true names and capacities, whether individual, plural, corporate,
22 partnership, associate, or otherwise, of DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, are unknown to
23 Plaintiffs who therefore sue said Defendants by such fictitious names. The full extent of the
24 facts linking such fictitiously sued Defendants is unknown to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are
25 informed and believe, and thereon allege, that each of the Defendants designated herein
26 as a DOE was, and is negligent, or in some other actionable manner, responsible for the
27 events and happenings hereinafter referred to, and thereby negligently, or in some other
28 actionable manner, legally and proximately caused the hereinafter described injuries and

1 damages to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs will hereafter seek leave of the Court to amend this
2 Complaint to show the Defendants' true names and capacities after the same have been
3 ascertained.
4 14. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that at all relevant
5 times herein, each of the Defendants was the agent, partner, co-conspirator, servant,
6 employer, and/or employee of each other, as well as each of their co-Defendants, and in
7 doing the things alleged herein, were acting within the course and scope of that agency,
8 partnership, conspiracy, and/or employment and with the permission and consent of each
9 of their co-Defendants, and were, in some way, negligently or otherwise, responsible forthe
10 events herein alleged.
11 15. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that at all relevant
o 12 times herein, each of the Defendants was responsible in some manner for the events and
0
LL
£ f"- 13 happenings herein referred to as a result of the negligence, statutory liability, nondelegable
£_ o
8
O to ^
Q_ CD <
14 duty, vicarious liability, or other basis which resulted in the death of Gerardo Ismael
>w o
•d ,£> a> 15 Hernandez and damages sustained by Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs sustained injury and damages
<o 0- a>
3
< 3< 16 proximately caused by Defendants, and each of them, at all times relevant, as a result of
S §
o3 17 Defendants' negligence, action, inaction, ownership, maintenance, negligent hiring,
o
*3-
co
18 negligenttraining, negligent supervision, negligent retention of unfit employees, contracting,
19 management, and operation, of their respective agencies, departments and duties.
20 16. This wrongful death action arises from a shooting that occurred at
21 approximately 9:20 a.m. on November 1,2013, when Transportation Security Administration
22 officer Gerardo Ismael Hernandez was shot and killed at Terminal 3 of Los Angeles
23 International Airport ("LAX") by Paul Ciancia ("Ciancia").
24 17. On the morning of Friday, November 1, 2013, Ciancia was allowed to enter
25 Terminal 3 of LAX carrying a bag filled with a semiautomatic rifle, five 30-round magazines,
26 and hundreds of additional rounds of ammunition. Ciancia walked up to a TSA checkpoint,
27 pulled out the rifle and opened fire, shooting Hernandez. Police officers were not present
28 to stop Ciancia or protect Hernandez, as the officers left their assigned posts without

1 reporting in or calling for backup officers, leaving the terminal without adequate security in
2 violation of Defendants' policies and procedures. Defendant Ciancia was able to freely walk
3 about, go up an escalator, return to the checkpoint, and shoot Hernandez yet again,
4 because inadequate security was present at the terminal due to the aforementioned
5 violation of Defendants' instructions, orders, directions, policies, and procedures.
6 18. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Doe Defendants
7 1 and 2 were Defendants', LAWA, City, LAWAPD, LAXPD, LAPD, and/or County,
8 officers/agents/employees assigned to Terminal 3 of LAX and that said Doe Defendants left
9 their positions in the terminal without calling for replacement officers, leaving the terminal
10 without adequate coverage, in violation of Defendants', Los Angeles World Airports', City
11 of Los Angeles', The Airport Police at Los Angeles', the Los Angeles Police Department's,
b 12 and the County of Los Angeles' instructions, orders, directions, policies and procedures.
Q
LL
£ f- 13 19. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants, Los
£_ 8
o
O to ^
0. CC <
14 Angeles World Airports, City of Los Angeles, the Airport Police at Los Angeles, Los Angeles
> LU O
•d CD 0) 15 Police Department, Los Angeles Fire Department, and County of Los Angeles, failed to
<D O- a>
3 B<
< 16 properly hire, train, and supervise their agents, partners, co-conspirators, contractors,
« 8
o 3 17 subcontractors, and/or employees. Further, Defendants did not properly hire, train, or
o
•"fr
CO
18 supervise personnel to assess emergency situations so as to properly and timely secure
19 LAX, timely summon medical aid, protect travelers, protect employees, or others.
20 20. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants, and
21 each of them, failed to properly assess the emergency situation or adequately, timely, and
22 properly secure LAX. Defendants, and each of them, did not follow incident command
23 basics and as a result Defendants failed to secure the terminal so that first responders
24 could enter. Hernandez lay wounded approximately 20 feet from an exit without medical
25 attention for more than thirty minutes. Hernandez was in immediate need of medical
26 attention. Defendants wrongfully, negligently, intentionally, and/or with a deliberate
27 indifference to Hernandez's rights and safety, failed to timely summon and/or provide
28 medical assistance to Hernandez. This delay in seeking and providing medical assistance
6
1 demonstrated a conscious disregard for Hernandez's medical condition, and was a
2 contributing factor in Hernandez's death.
4 each of them, failed to implement and have in place, an adequate security and incident
5 prevention policy and procedure, an alert and response mobilization policy and procedure,
6 a proper incident command structure that integrated all response partners, and failed to
7 interface, train, and synchronize personnel. Further, Defendants, and each of them, had
8 an inadequate victim extraction plan in place at the time of the incident. Defendants'
9 training was inadequate and deficient, Defendants failed to train service workers, and
10 Defendants failed to include all airport personnel in emergency drills. There existed
11 inadequate emergency response training to respond effectively to active shooter scenarios,
o 12 there was a lack of specialized training for workers who perform security functions, there
Q
u_
£ N-
ID tfi
13 were inadequate emergency response and evacuation drills, and an unreliable emergency
T— O
.o
o m« 14 infrastructure. Several years prior to this incident, the mayoral committee disclosed and
Q_ (0 <
^ UJ Q
•J CO 0) 15 Defendants failed to rectify significant deficiencies, including but not limited to, a lack of
o Q- a;
5 If 16 standardized approaches to response times for incidents; a failure to implement

3°
o 17 recommendations requiring law enforcement officer presence within 300 feet of TSA
•sf
CO
18 screening stations; a failure to implement recommendations to allow police access to
19 closed-circuit TVs; a lack of definitive standards of operating procedures between law
20 enforcement officers and TSA; a failure to provide tools, equipment and resources for law
21 enforcement officers to better perform their jobs. It was also found that airport management
22 at LAX had not balanced policing and security with their ambitions to physically expand the
23 airport; failed to timely implement and address RAND findings for enhancing security which
24 were presented and recommended in 2004 and 2006, including updated technology
25 systems; and failed to remedy insufficient and ineffective coordination and communication
26 between agencies and Defendants. LAWAPD denied LAPD's request for cooperation in
27 an assessment of the airport, there was inconsistent gathering and sharing of intelligence,
28 Defendants failed to regularly schedule meetings among all public safety and security

1 agencies at LAX, and tensions between the LAWAPD and LARD command staff and the
2 airport police union impacted coordination of law enforcement activities at the airport.
3 These were all a factor in causing Decedent's death and Plaintiffs' injuries and damages.
4 Prior to and subsequent to this incident there was found to be a lack of coordination of
5 police services by LAWAPD and LAPD; police resources were diverted away from LAX; and
6 there was a lack of a single unified police department, all instrumental in the death of
7 Decedent.
9 each of them, failed to properly inspect and maintain the premises and emergency
10 equipment, including but not limited to, deficient and inadequate communication equipment
11 and emergency alert and warning systems, resulting in delayed communications and
o 12 responses during the incident. The 911 "Red Phones" were outdated, and in some
o
LL
£ f-
lb CO
13 instances, were networking properly. When 911 calls were made, operators were unable
r- O
.O
o V) -•
•K O)
14 to determine where the calls were coming from, delaying response time of emergency
CL rtl
<
>w o
3•= %
J? ® 15 personnel. The 911 system at LAX did not go to airport police and this issue was identified
<D Q. 0)
3
< B<
^ c
16 and addressed as problematic years before this incident, putting Defendants on notice of
S 8
o3
o 17 the deficiencies and dangers. Also addressed prior to this incident was a deficiency that
CO
18 at LAX 911 calls from land lines go to LAPD while 911 calls from cell phones go to the
19 sheriff's department negatively impacting response time and coordination. Further, there
20 were multiple inoperable panic buttons, with some reports stating as many as eleven of the
21 twelve were inoperable. Had the panic buttons been operational they would have
22 automatically notified the authorities of an emergency and pointed a camera toward the
23 area in question, giving police a bird's eye view into the situation, making the rendering of
24 aid to Decedent and securing the facility possible.
26 each of them, failed to implement security technology that would have facilitated
27 communications among the law enforcement agencies even though recommended by the
28 Mayor's Blue Ribbon Panel on Airport Security in 2011, two years predating this incident.

1 There were problems with the Regional Video Command Center resulting in delays at LAX,
2 and inadequate radio communications and interoperability between Defendants. Further,
3 Defendants failed to supervise and monitor contractors retained to repair, remedy, and/or
4 update LAX emergency and communications equipment. The work was not performed
5 and/or was not performed in a timely manner. Defendants failed to properly inspect its'
6 premises and created a dangerous condition thereon that Defendants failed to rectify.
7 24. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants, City
8 of Los Angeles and LAWA, failed to implement a record keeping system to track and ensure
9 proper use of LAX revenues for police services and failed to maximize resources.
10 Defendants agreed to implement the record keeping system on a full time basis starting July
11 2012. This failure resulted in approximately $7.87 million in unsupported charges, without
o 12 adequate documentation, for police services to the airport. An additional $49 million in
0
LL
€ f"-
in co 13 policing funds were illegally diverted by Defendants according to the U. S. Department of
o
_o
O tS ^
0_ CD <
14 Transportation inspector General. Plaintiffs allege the diverted funds were earmarked for
> Wo
•= s* <y 15 and should have been used to increase security personnel, improve security, improve
0)0-0)
16 response time, and update antiquated equipment and services.

S3 17 25. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that the acts and
o
"t
CO
18 omissions of Defendants, and each of them, as fully alleged herein, were a breach of their
19 respective duties owed to Plaintiffs and decedent and were a direct, proximate, and legal
20 cause of Plaintiffs' injuries and damages, as further alleged herein. In addition to the
21 above, the acts and omissions of Defendants, and each of them, that were in breach of the
22 duties owed to Plaintiffs include but are not limited to:
23 Defendants failed to timely implement five specific areas for improvement that
24 were advised by the Mayor's panel in 2011: (a) emergency management did
25 not become a higher priority at LAX; (2) LAWA did not ensure conformity to
26 the emergency management requirements set by the City for all departments;
27 (3) LAWA's emergency management plans were not reviewed for compliance
28 with federal, state and local policies; (4) emergency management training and

1 exercises for LAWA were not integrated into and coordinated with citywide
2 efforts; and (5) LAWA emergency management and the City's Emergency
3 Management Department did not communicate with each other more
4 effectively;
5 Defendants failed to timely notify each other of the incident at LAX;
6 There was inadequate interaction between Defendants, LAWA, City,
7 LAWAPD, LARD, LAFD and County;
8 LAWA's, City's, LAWAPD's, LAPD's, LAFD's and County's allocation and
9 utilization of resources was deficient;
10 LAWAPD failed to participate in antiterrorist committees and task forces with
11 other law enforcement agencies at LAX and this impacted prevention and
o 12 alignment of resources;
o
u_
£ f-
UD <0 13 There exists a lack of strong leadership and accountability of LAWAPD;
v— O
.o
O to ^
Q_ flJ < 14 LAWAPD lacks the knowledge and experience of LAPD and inadequately
> LU O
3
-jj £
CO »
o 15 trains, supervises, and retains personnel;
<D CL Q
Sff 16 LAWA, City, LAWAPD, LAPD, LAFD and County, failed to coordinate
3 °
o 17 deployment of supplemental resources;
oo
18 LAPD's failure to include LAWAPD on the distribution list for LAPD training
19 bulletins resulted in LAWAPD officers lack of knowledge of updated LAPD
20 policy and procedures;
21 LAWAPD Emergency Services Unit's ("ESU") missions were not clearly
22 delineated leading to a tendency of ESU to respond to a tactical situation as
23 if it were a SWAT team even though it lacks the training and experience of the
24 LAPD SWAT team;
25 There is a nonexistent and/or deficient policy governing deployment of certain
26 weapons and munitions;
27 There was a lack of coordinated training and intelligence gathering activities
28 between Defendants, LAWA, City, LAWAPD, LAPD, LAFD, and County;
10

1 There was a lack of Multi-Assault Counterterrorism Action Capability training
2 for active shooter scenarios;
3 There was a lack of field force training between LAWA, City, LAWAPD,
4 LARD, LAFD, and County;
5 Defendants, LAWA, City, LAWAPD, LARD, LAFD and County, retained unfit
6 employees; and
7 There was a lack of LAWA, City, LAWAPD, LARD, LAFD and County, multi-
8 agency training.
9 26. On April 16,2014, Plaintiffs timely filed a Claim for Damages against the City
10 of Los Angeles, including but not limited to the Los Angeles World Airport, the Airport Police
11 at Los Angeles World Airport, and other City of Los Angeles agencies. On May 31, 2014,
o 12 Los Angeles World Airports denied Plaintiffs' claim. On May 30, 2014, the City of Los
Li_
<6 r--
ib to 13 Angeles denied Plaintiffs' claim. The Claim for Damages and denial letters are attached
T- O
_o
O to ^
0_ « < 14 hereto as Exhibit 1.
> LU o
i n*
T™ tO (U 15 27. On April 17,2014, Plaintiffs filed a Claim for Damages against the County of
S Q. a>
16 Los Angeles. On April 22, 2014, the County of Los Angeles, rejected Plaintiffs'claim. The
o g
o5 17 Claim for Damages and rejection letter are attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
o
3
18 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Pursuant to Cat. Government Code §815.2
19 Liability for Injuries by Employee Within Scope of Employment)
(By Plaintiffs Against All Defendants and Does 1 through 50)
20
21 28. Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate by reference each and every
22 preceding paragraph as though fully set forth herein.
23 29. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and
24 Does 1 through 50, and each of them, pursuant to Cal. Government Code § 815.2(a) are
25 liable for injury proximately caused by the acts and omissions of their employees, which are
26 described more fully herein, including but not limited to, officers leaving their assigned posts
27 without calling in and securing backup, employees failing to follow instructions, orders,
28 policies, and procedures, employees failing to properly access the emergency situation or
11

1 timely securing the terminal and seeking medical aid for Decedent, and employees illegally
2 diverting in excess of $49 million in policing funds.
3 30. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, their
4 employees, and Does 1 through 50, and each of them, as a result of their negligence,
5 action, and/or inaction, caused injury and damages to Plaintiffs, and in doing the things
6 herein above alleged were acting within the course and scope of such agency and
7 employment.
8 31. The acts and omissions of Defendants, and Does 1 through 50, and each of
9 them, as fully alleged herein were in breach of their respective duties owed to Plaintiffs and
10 decedent and were a direct, proximate and legal cause of the injuries and ultimate death
11 of the decedent as further alleged herein.
o 12 32. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of the Defendants
o
Li_
£ r- 13 and Does 1 through 50, and each of them, as further alleged herein, Plaintiffs have and will
!£ o
_o
9
n « 3
to < 14 sustain pecuniary loss resulting from a loss of teaching, skill, knowledge, service, talent,
> LU o
J-s»
•d i0 u
<D CL Qj
15 love, comfort, affection, companionship, guidance, society, care, solace, and moral support.
2 >. o)
<35 16 Plaintiffs have and will by virtue of these losses suffer both economic and noneconomic
ss
o 3
o 17 damages, both past and future, in amounts to be determined according to proof at the time
Tj"
CO
18 of trial.
19 33. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of the Defendants
20 and Does 1 through 50, and each of them, as further alleged herein, Plaintiffs have and will
21 further suffer certain economic damages for burial and other final expenses of the
22 decedent.
23 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(Pursuant to Cal. Government Code §815.4
24 Liability for Injuries by Independent Contractors)
25
28 ///
12

2 Does 51 through 75, and each of them, pursuant to Cal. Government Code § 815.4 are
3 liable for injury proximately caused by a tortious act or omission of an independent
4 contractor, which are described more fully herein, including but not limited to failing to
5 repair/replace defective communication equipment and emergency alert warning systems,
6 failing to rectify and repair routing of land line and cell phone calls, failing to timely and
7 adequately update security technology to facilitate communications, and failing to
8 repair/replace defective 911 "Red Phones" and inoperable panic buttons, resulting in
9 delayed communications and responses during the incident.
11 Does 51 through 75, and each of them, had a duty to own, operate, maintain, inspect,
u
12 repair, and secure the premises and emergency equipment at LAX in a timely manner, as
8
LL
13 alleged herein with such care and skill so as to avoid causing injury and harm to others
H .o
o -s ® 14 including the decedent Gerardo Ismael Hernandez.
3 !s
o 0. -J
3II
"U •>. o
16 agents, contractors, subcontractors, and Does 51 through 75, and each of them, as a result
S3 17 of their negligence, action, and/or inaction, caused injury and damages to Plaintiffs, and in
18 doing the things herein alleged were acting within the course and scope of such agency and
19 employment.
20 38. The acts and omissions of Defendants, and Does 51 through 75, and each
21 of them, as fully alleged herein were in breach of their respective duties owed to Plaintiffs
22 and decedent and were a direct, proximate, and legal cause of the injuries and ultimate
23 death of the decedent as further alleged herein.
25 and Does 51 through 75, as further alleged herein, Plaintiffs have and will sustain pecuniary
26 loss resulting from a loss of teaching, skill, knowledge, service, talent, love, comfort,
27 affection, companionship, guidance, society, care, solace, and moral support. Plaintiffs
28 III
13

1 have and will by virtue of these losses suffer both economic and noneconomic damages,
2 both past and future, in amounts to be determined according to proof at the time of trial.
4 and Does 51 through 75, and each of them, as further alleged herein, Gerardo Ismael
5 Hernandez died and Plaintiffs' suffered damages, as set forth herein.
6 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Pursuant to Cal. Government Code §815.6
7 Mandatory Duty of Public Entity to Protect Against Particular Kinds of Injuries)
11 Does 1 through 100, and each of them, are liable for Decedent's death and Plaintiffs'
o
Q
12 injuries and damages pursuant to Cal. Government Code § 815.6. Defendants had a
Li.
£
LO <X> 13 mandatory duty imposed by enactment that was designed to protect against the risk of a
r- O
.O
OVi™
CL ro < 14 particular kind of injury, namely the death of Gerardo Hernandez, and Defendants failed to
> W O
«
•c S
5 ® 15 discharge that duty and Defendants failed to exercise reasonable diligence to discharge
0 0-0)
2 >. D)
16 said duty.
® 8
o5
o 17 43. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Decedent and
00
18 Plaintiffs were harmed because Defendants, and Does 1 through 100, and each of them,
19 violated 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139 requirements to develop and
20 implement an airport safety self-inspection program, as set forth more fully herein.
21 Defendants were under a duty to perform periodic condition inspections of the facilities.
22 Special inspections of the facilities were also required to be conducted when an unusual
23 condition or unusual event occurs on the airport. Prior to the subject incident several
24 unusual events occurred, including but not limited to dry ice bomb explosions. The safety
25 self-inspection requirements include procedures for reporting and correcting deficiencies.
26 Defendants, and each of them, violated said requirements, as described more fully herein.
27 44. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Decedent and
14

1 violated 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139 requirements that during
2 inspection of aircraft rescue and fire fighting capabilities, the inspector is required to ensure
3 alarm and emergency notification communication systems are operable. Defendants were
4 under a duty to identify the unsatisfactory conditions and take appropriate follow-up action
5 to remedy the unsatisfactory condition.
8 violated 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139.325 requirements that Defendants
9 develop and maintain an airport emergency plan designed to minimize the possibility and
10 extent of personal injury and property damage on the airport in an emergency. The plan
11 required under the Code must contain adequate guidance to implement and respond to "a
o 12 sabotage, hijack incidents, and other unlawful interference with operations." The Code also
o
LL
5 h- 13 calls for provisions for medical services, and Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the plan
£_ o
8
CL TO < 14 and procedures were either not in place or substantially deficient and therefore in violation
> LU Q
» 15 of the Code.
•c! to <u
© a. a>
2 >> DJ
© 8
o 5 17 Plaintiffs were harmed because Defendants, and Does 1 through 100, and each of them,
o
CO
18 further violated 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139.325 requirements that
19 Defendants have in place procedures for the marshaling, transportation, and care of
20 ambulatory injured and uninjured accident survivors, and working emergency alarm or
21 notification systems. Further, each certificate holder is required to coordinate the plan with
22 law enforcement agencies, rescue and firefighting agencies, medical personnel and
23 organizations, the principal tenants at the airport, and all other person who have
24 responsibilities under the plan.
27 violated 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139.325 requirements that Defendants
28 review the plan with all of the parties with whom the plan is coordinated at least once very
15

1 12 consecutive months to ensure that all parties know their responsibilities and that all of
2 the information in the plan is current.
5 violated Title 49, Subtitle B, Chapter XII, Subchapter C, Part 1542, Subpart C, §§ 1500 -
6 1699 of the Federal Regulations which govern airport security and operations. Section
7 1542.217 sets forth requirements that law enforcement personnel meet certain
8 qualifications and complete a training program that meets the training standard for law
9 enforcement officers prescribed by either State or local jurisdiction in which the airport is
10 located, and that the training standards be acceptable to the ISA, if the State and local
11 jurisdictions in which the airport is located do not prescribe training standards. Defendants,
o 12 as defined in the Federal Regulations were airport operators required to have a security
o
Li.
ID CO
(*-
13 program under § 1542.103(a) or (b). Section 1542.215, titled law enforcement support,
T— O
„o
O U) ^ 14 required that each airport operator must provide (1) law enforcement personnel in the
Q. TO <
> Hi Q
-d ro <D 15 number and manner adequate to support its security program; and (2) uniformed law
<D 0- <u
3!< 16 enforcement personnel in the number and manner adequate to support each system for
o3 17 screening persons and accessible property required under part 1544 or 1546. As set forth
o
•sf
co
18 more fully herein, the training program did not meet the training standards, funds allocated
19 for police staffing were illegally diverted, and Plaintiffs are informed and believe, insufficient
20 law enforcement personnel were allocated.
22 agents, employees, supervisors, managers, contractors, subcontractors, and Does 1
23 through 100, and each of them, as a result of their negligence, action, and/or inaction, in
24 failing to perform their mandatory duties, caused injury and damages to Plaintiffs.
27 and decedent and were a direct, proximate, and legal cause of the injuries and ultimately
28 ///
16
1 the death of the decedent as further alleged herein. Defendants' failure to perform their
2 duties was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs' harm.
7 have and will by virtue of these losses suffer both economic and noneconomic damages,
8 both past and future, in amounts to be determined according to proof at the time of trial.
10 and Does 1 through 100, as further alleged herein, Gerardo Ismael Hernandez died and
11 Plaintiffs suffered damages, as set forth herein.
o 12 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Q
LL (Pursuant to Cal. Government Code §818.6
£ t-- 13 Liability for Failure to Inspect, or Negligent Inspection of Property)
£8 (By Plaintiffs Against All Defendants and Does 1 through 100)
o
Q. f J
CO < 14
1^ 53. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and
5 LU o
-2 la j8 15 Does 1 through 100, and each of them, pursuant to Cal. Government Code § 818.6 are
<D Q- (U
2 >. D>
< a< 16 liable for injury caused by the failure to make an inspection, or by reason of making an
© 8
o 3 17 inadequate or negligent inspection, of its property, which are described more fully herein,
o
"tf
co
18 including but not limited to failing to inspect and/or inadequately or negligently inspecting
19 communication equipment and emergency alert warning systems including, but not limited
20 to the 911 "Red Phones" and panic buttons which turned out to be defective and/or
21 inoperable resulting in delayed communications and responses during the incident.
22 54. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants and
23 Does 1 through 100, and each of them, had a duty to adequately inspect the premises and
24 emergency equipment at LAX, as alleged herein with such care and skill so as to avoid
25 causing injury and harm to others including the Gerardo Ismael Hernandez.
27 agents, employees, supervisors, managers, contractors, subcontractors, and Does 1
28 through 100, and each of them, as a result of their negligence, action, and/or inaction, in
17

1 failing to inspect and/or inadequately or negligently inspecting communication equipment
2 and emergency alert warning systems including the 911 "Red Phones" and panic buttons,
3 caused injury and damages to Plaintiffs.
6 and decedent and were a direct, proximate and legal cause of the injuries and ultimately the
7 death of the Gerardo Ismael Hernandez as further alleged herein.
o 12 have and will by virtue of these losses suffer both economic and noneconomic damages,
o
LL.
£
in to
1^ 13 both past and future, in amounts to be determined according to proof at the time of trial.
o
_o
O tS ® 14 58. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of the Defendants
O. ra <
>w o
5 * »
•d P a> 15 and Does 1 through 100, as further alleged herein, Gerardo Ismael Hernandez died and
<i> O- (i>
3
<* c
! < 16 Plaintiffs suffered damages, as set forth herein.
S 8
o5 17 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
o
't
00 (Pursuant to Caf. Government Code §835 et seq.
18 Liability for Injury Caused by Dangerous Condition of Property)
20 each of them, pursuant to Ca/. Government Code §§ 835(a)(b) and 835.2 are liable for
21 injury caused by a dangerous condition of its property.
23 Does 1 through 100, and each of them, owned or controlled the property; the property was
24 in a dangerous condition at the time of the incident; the dangerous condition created a
25 reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of incident that occurred; the negligent or wrongful
26 conduct of Defendants, their agents, employees, supervisors, managers, contractors,
27 subcontractors, and each of them, created the dangerous condition; Defendants had notice
28 of the dangerous condition for a long enough time to have protected against it; Decedent
18

1 and Plaintiffs were harmed; and the dangerous condition was a substantial factor in causing
2 Decedent's and Plaintiffs' harm, which are described more fully herein.
3 61. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants and
4 Does 1 through 100, and each of them, inadequately or negligently inspected
5 communication equipment and emergency alert warning systems including, but not limited
6 to, the 911 "Red Phones" and panic buttons and failed to timely and properly repair and/or
7 replace the defective and/or inoperable equipment creating, and allowing to exist, the
8 dangerous condition of its property.

g 62. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants, and
10 Does 1 through 100, and each of them, had a duty to timely remediate the dangerous
11 condition of its property, which was known to them, as alleged herein with such care and
o 12 skill so as to avoid causing injury and harm to others including the decedent Gerardo Ismael
o
Li-
£ f
in 13 Hernandez.
r- o
_o
O to ^ 14 63. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, their
Q. to <
> LU o
•J ro a> 15 agents, employees, supervisors, managers, contractors, subcontractors, and Does 1
<D Q- a5
2 ^ 0 )
< 3< 16 through 100, and each of them, as a result of their negligence, action, and/or inaction, in
o°
o 8
o 17 failing to timely remediate the dangerous condition of its property, which was known to
"tf-
co
18 them, caused injury and damages to Plaintiffs.
21 and decedent and were a direct, proximate and legal cause of the injuries and ultimate
22 death of the decedent as further alleged herein.
26 affection, companionship, guidance, society, care, solace and moral support. Plaintiffs have
27 and will by virtue of these losses suffer both economic and noneconomic damages, both
28 past and future in amounts to be determined according to proof at the time of trial.
19

2 and Does 1 through 100, as further alleged herein, Decedent was killed and Plaintiffs
3 suffered damages, as set forth herein.
4 PRAYER FOR DAMAGES
5 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for damages against Defendants, and each of them,
6 as follows:
7 1. For general damages according to proof as against all defendants;
8 2. For economic damages according to proof against all defendants;
9 3. For interest as allowed by law;
10 4. For costs of the suit incurred herein; and
11 5. For such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper.
o 12
0
LL
fe 13 DATED: October 6, 2014 ALDERLAW, PC
5§
o«
Vi §
-•
Q. OJ < 14
> W O
s
l-fi ®
TJ JP «
<D Q. a>
15 BY:
2 >> cn I ER
<=5 16 MARM u CARUSO
S 8 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
o3 17
o
CO
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
20

1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2 Plaintiffs hereby demand, as a matter of right, trial by jury in this case on all causes
3 ©faction.
5 DATED: October 6, 2014 ALDBRL
6
7 BY:
M LDER
8 MARY L. C7WUSO
Attorneys for Plaintiff
g
10
11
b 12
o
LL
€ f-
lb to 13
x- O
.o
O% ® 14
Q. (D <
> HJ o
5 -fi
•d ro »
a) 15
0)0-0)
16
o 17
••3-
00
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
21

EXHIBIT 1
romooKT. »»•* (KMim) RESBRVEP0RF3XJNG STAMP
CLAIM NO.
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
TO PERSONOR PROPERTY
iNsmircnoNS . .
U Claims for death, fajuiy to person or to personal propertymustbs filed not
later than sixaaonths after the occurrence, (Gov. Code See. 91J,2),
2 . Claims for damages relatingto any other type of occurrence must be filed not
later than one year after the occurrence. (Gov. Code Seo, 911.2),
3. Read entire claim before Silng. Claim caa bemailed or filed lA persoit Nofexes
accepted. • •
4. See Page 3 for diagram upon which to locateplace ofaccident,
5. Thfeclalittfommust'beslgfledonPageSatiottom. • o
6. Attach separate sfceets, If necessaiy, to giveM details. SIGKBACH SHEBT,
I 2 oS
7. Fill out fti duplicate. ONE COPY TO BEBBTAIhPD BY CLAXMAHT,
8. Clftlm mustbe filed wift CItY CLERK^ (Oov. Code Seo. 915A)
200 NORTH SPRING STBSBT. ROOM395.CTrY HALL. LOSANGELES. CA 90012
TO: cmr OF LOS ANGELES :
Name ofClaimant Ago ofClaimant

Ana Z. Machuca, Lute G. Hernandez, and Stephanie M. Hernandez 35,14, and 11
- Home address ofClaimant City, State and Zip Code Home Telephone Number
Business address of Claimant City, State and Zip Code • ' Business Teleplioue Number
Oive address to which youdesire notices or communicadons to he cent regarding this claim:
C.Michael Aider o/o AfderLaw PC 1840 Century Park East, 1gth Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90067
How dldDAMAGE or INJURYoccur? Pleaseincludeasmuch-delait as possible, ^ '
Transportation SacurJty AdminlstraUon officer Oerardo Ismae! Hernandez (Claimant's husband and father) wa$ shdt and
killed at Terminal 3 of L09 Angeles Internationa) Airport by Paul Cianda. '
When did DAMAGEor INJURY occur? Please include the date and time of the damageor injury, •
Approximately 9:20 a,m, on November 1,2013
Where did DAMAGEor INJURY occur? Please describe fiilty, andlocate on the diagramon the reverse sideofthis Sheet, .
Where appropriate,please give street names and addresses or measurements ftom speciflo landmarks: _ ,
Terminal 3 of Los Angeles International Alrpdrt, 380 World-Way, Los Angeles, CA 9004$
What particular ACT orOMISSION do you claim caused the tojuty or damage? Please give namesof City employees
causing theihjury or damage and Identity any vehicles involved by license plate number)ifknown. .
See Attachment '
Please listnames and address of Witnesses, Doctors and Hospitals: - *

LAC/UCLA Harbor Medical Center, Los Angeles Fire Department, Or. Kathy Palatnlk, Or. David Plurad, Krlsty McCracken,
Assistant Chief Ed Winter, Larry Dletz
SEEPAGES THIS CLAIMMUST BE SIGNBP ATBOTTOM ,

PAGE 2
f
What DAMAGE or INJURIES do you ctetoi restflted? Please giveMl extent of injuries or damages claimed:
Wrongful Death of Gerardo Hernandez causing loss of support to hfs wife and children, all of whom further suffered loss of
(ova, affection, oare, comfort, society, companionship and guidance of their husband and father.
What is the AMOUNTofyour claim? Please fcrntee your damages:

Although (he exact-amoimt cannot yet be (mown, the total dabn for economlo and non-eoonomio.damages will exceed
$25 million.
If youhave received any Insurance payments, please give die names of the Insurance companies:
Unknown at this time.
For all accident claims pleaseplace on the following diagram thenames of the streets where the accident occurred and
thenearest cross-streets; indicatethe place ofthe accident by an"X6 and by showingthe nearest address and distances to
street comers. Please indicatewhereNorthis cm fhe diagram.
• Note: if the diagram, does not fit the situation, please attach your owndiagram, '
v
tti' Mi m* . &£ * V
n \ -J- U
* I
.
'"aBBBSfe*'"-"**
' i r i I'm •«**
y WlM '.mil. 11. i iwinw+yw—n»|W-WHIi-ll* I •*r •.. • * -•« *
-n-rv '
HPS ,.! • •• • FNWffKf ~
"i'Cw"•i>7w
-T .. . »<WMI>l»Wl|ifc« rt.tpil MI
' -
Signature of Claimant or person filing Print Name: Date:

on olaimant's behalfgWngrel^lonsblp
to elairaant; - ^ /
MICHAEL ALDER 4/16/14
PAGE 3 •J
f
ATTACHMENT
What particufar ACT or OMISSION do you claim oaused the Injury or damage? Pleasegive
names of CEty employees causing the injury or damage and Identity any vehiolea Involved
by license plate number, If known.
The City of Los Angeles, Including but not limited to the Los Angeles World Airport
(LAWA), the Airport Police at Los Angeles World Airport, and other City of Los Angeles
agencies, failed to properly hire, supervise, train, staff, and plan for the protection and
safely of Individuals and personnel at Los Angeles International Airport. Further, City of
Los Angeles employees failed In the performance- of their duties which created a
dangerous lapse In security that allowed Gerardo Ismael Hernandez to be fatally shot and
killed at Terminal 3 of Los Angeles International Airport by Paul Clancla. Further, City of
Los Angeles employees prevented and/or delayed medical care to be properly and/or'
timely administered to Injured people, As a direct result of the wrongful acts and omissions
of its officers, directors, employees and agents, claimants suffered damages.
*#*5
5* World Airports
•iflj
rw
i;
CERTIFIED RETURN
RECEIPT REQUESTED
May 31,2014
&.AX Ms. Ana Z. Machuca

LA/Ontario c/o C. Michael Alder, AdlerLaw PC
V»n Nujns 1840 Century Park East, 15th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067
(SHy Ansirfos
Eric Gnrcsul
MayOf RE: Claimant: Ana Z. Machuca
Date of Loss: November 1,2013
8«ant of Afrpei't
C<t>asiiiS8lon«r& LAWA Claim No.: 2013084001/BDB
.3i?an O, Sudan
PfBSWenl: Dear Ms. Machuca:
VwteNH C. Veissco
Viae PftiBldenl
Notice is hereby given that the claim you presented to the Board of Airport
GaMsi L. f-eshaghlan Commissioners on April 16,2014 is deemed denied by operation of law. (See
Jfiohis RoK'tetg
Bsatrieo c:. Hsu California Government Code Section 912.4).
Mfittlww Mi .lolinson
f>, Cyrilhln A. Twll«S
Please note the foilowing:
Gina Marie Undnay
Execnttva Direritor
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date
this notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mall to file a court
action on this claim. (See California Government Code Section 945.6).
You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with
this matter. If you so desire to consult an attorney, you should do so
immediately.
Sincerely,
/
P. '
Bruce D. Brown, Risk Manager III
Risk Management Division
BDB:clp
cc: O. Winslow
D. Heersema
File
fmiPbS
'HP
i WCiM VW)y LosAfltfOlM CslHosViia 90045-BC(r3 Mall RO. Sw Los CwtlMfna TeWtttfis <!;10 SlJ'iii liitonts* V/VAt,.i?W3,(>«ri>
-•aS
•Sli!
re
CERTIFIED RETURN
RECEIPT REQUESTED
May 31,2014
(LAX
Master Luis G. Hernandez
LMStitutfo c/o C. Michael AlderLaw PC
Van Ntjya 1840 Century Park East, 15th Floor
Cfty ifrf !.&& Arnfftto
Erio cwreeiil
Wfiyor RE: Claimant: Luis C. Hernandez
Date of Loss: November 1,2013
Boai'd of Alrjiort
Cofflmteiflortora LAWA Claim No.: 2013084G02/BDB
Ssnr* o. Ouiiofl
President Dear Master Hernandez:
ValartH c. Veiswjo
Vice Preslderit
Notice is hereby given that the claim.you presented to the Board of Airport
QsDrlwi L, EHhajiljiflri Commissioners on April 16, 2014 Is deemed denied by operation of law. (See
JtwM® ttolcibstg
Be-atrlee C. Hsu California Government Code Section 912.4).
Mattnw M. JoivuHir
Of. Cynthis A
Please note the following:
Gins Mario Lindsay
cMKutive Diractur
this notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file a court
immediately.
Sincerely,
f Oe' d...

BDBxIp
cc: O. Winslow
D. Heersema
File
l 'Afjil-j W u y I/JS Angelas CailFWnls 90046 5303 MaH {30,09*92:226 LosMgples CfKlffrmfc S000&-22a5 Tcieiitwn# -310 6-56 6252 JlrtamAfc VrVwf.^wa.&S'O
Los Angeles
World Airports
CERTIFIED RETURN
RECEIPT REQUESTED
May 31,2014
LAK
Miss Stephanie M. Hernandez
do C. Michael Alder, AlderLaw PC
Van Nujrs 1840 Century Park East, 15th Floor
C% «f Los
Grio Gawettl
Map* RE: Claimant: Stephanie M. Hernandez
Date of Loss: November 1, 2013
Boanl Alrgiurl
LAWA Claim No.: 2013084003/BDB
Sw 0. Suiton
PrOHlOBrii; Dear Miss Hernandez:
VJlilefia C. Wistoco
Vloa
Notice Is hereby given that the claim you presented to the Board of Airport
GaMsl L, eBteghim Commissioners on April 16,2014 is deemed denied by operation of law. (See
Jachls (fcltibeig
btftHtrice C. Hsu California Government Code Section 912.4).
Matttisw M. .Ittiivjon
at. Cynthio A Tol!«w
Please note the following:
Glna Mdila Linciauy
Ewftutlvo Director
this notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file a court
immediately.
Sincerely,
ft ' 4 '

BDB:cip
cc: O. Winslow
D. Heersema
File
1 tfWiltfway 'LosAng«le» CslHo.-nls 90040-5603 Mall K!.9i»a22Se UsARgeies CaSWrniB 90009-2216 Tetopswnft 3100485252 wwwiaft-e.eeto
\m\
r *m
Mm sriTii
i iriLr-
^••-,..4
MICHAEL N. FEUER
CnV ATTORNEY
05/30/2014
C. M. Alder
AlderLaw PC
1840 Century Park East, 15th Floor
RE: Our Claim No.: C14-4155

Your Client; AnaZ. Machuca, Luis G. Hernandez and Stephanie Hernandez
Date of Loss: 11/01/2013 .
Dear Mr. Alder:
The subject claim against the City has been referred to this office.
After reviewing the circumstances of the claim and the applicable law, it has been determined
that the claim should be denied. •
This letter represents a formal notice to you that said claim has been denied. In view of this
action, we are required by law to give you the following warning:
***WARNING***
"Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the
date this notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to
file a court action alleging state causes of action. The time within
which federal causes of action must be filed is governed by federal
statutes."
"You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection

with this matter. If you desire to consult an attorney, you should do so
immediately."
V/fy tpiy*youjs,
•V-*"
THOMAS H. PETERS
•hief
<& Assistant City Attorney
THP:am
Telephone: (213) 978-8277
Enclosure(s)
J:
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
I, Alfred Martinez, declare as follows:
I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to this action. My business address is 200 North
Main Street, Room 600, City Hall East, Los Angeles, California 90012, which is located in the
county where the mailing described below took place.
I am readily familiar with the business practice at my place of business for collection and
processing correspondence for mailing via the United States Postal Service. Correspondence
so collected and processed is deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in
the ordinary course of business. .
On 05/30/2014, at my place of business at Los Angeles, California, I mailed a Denial Letter

for Claim Number C14-4155 by placing it, with postage thereon fully prepaid, for collection
and mailing via the United States mail addressed as follows:
C, M. Alder
AlderLaw PC
1840 Century Park East, 15th Floor
I declare under penalty of peijury that the following is true and correct. Executed on
05/30/2014, at Los Angeles, California.
Alfred Martinez
EXHIBIT 2
PILED
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
COUNTY OFLOS ANGELES TO PERSdN OR PROPERTY
W APR 17 Ml 9* 46
ni
•5? log INSTRUCTIONS!
& *? 7. Read dafm thoroughly.
2. Fill out claim as Indicated; attach additional Information If necessary. w£
3. Please return this original signed claim and any attachments
i+l supporting your claim. This form must be signed. eOAROOF SUPERVISORS
kV COUHTY OF LOS ANGELES
v DELIVER OR U.S MAIL TO;
> v% EXECUTIVEOFFICER, BOARD OF 5UPIRW50M,ATTENnON; CLAIMS
500WESTTEMPLE STREET. ROOM 383, KENNETH HAHN HALL OF
ADMINISTRATION, LOS ANGELES, CA90012 (2ia 974-1440
'•r- Wi- cn Ms.n Mrs LAST NAME nwrNAUE iavmy OOYOU oAiucoumY is flEWONSiaiH
^ 1 ' Machucs, Ana (See attachment A for add'i claimants)
iDDACSSO
eaew, Park East, 16th PI., Los Angeles, OA 90067 SeeAltachmentB
Strut CltKStll* apoodc
HOMETEIEPHOHE.' eWINtSSHlEPKONI:
t
LCUUMANTSBIRTHDATE! T
(310)2759131
LOAWAKTS SOCIAL SKlBUTYNUMBtR n. NWJESOFANra)WfIYeMPlOYKS(Ant)7WBRDB>AmtEN7S)
WAtl97% (SM Attacbment A for edd'i obbnanttj fswAttftdimaitAforaddl MVOlVai HMKIRYOR DUUGE(If APPLKASLE) i
5. DAIEANOIVilEOF MCIOENT cUimmts) NAME MFC
Approximately 9:20 e.m. on November1,2013 See Attechment B
FUME MFT
6, t WM£ D!0OA^MSEOR WW OCCUR? 12. WTIJesa TO DAMAGE OS IKJUIff:US1 ALlFSWHSfiSD AOWE5JH

Terminal 3 of Los Angeles fnt'f Airport, 380 World Way, Ua Angeles,CA 90045 Of PHtSOtC KNOWK TO HAVE INKIRUATKW:
Sveet Clcy.Sute Bp Code 1AME MWST

Dr.Davfd-Plurad (310)222.1912
7. DESCfil&S IN DETAILKOW DAMAGE OR IHJUftYOCCURfifO: UXNESS
Transportation Security Administration Officer Gerardo I. f-femandez{Claimante' LAC/Harbor-UCLA Med C(r^ 1000 W. Carson St.. Carson, CA 90502
NAME PHONE
husband and father) was shot and killed at Terminal 3 of LAX by Paul Clancfa. Paramedics of LA Fire Dept.
ADDRESS
4AME PHONE
13. U5T DAMAGES IfCURftEOTO DATE(and alBch e^)!w ofrtctlpts orHpilr

MUmate): Wrongful death of Gerardo 1. Hernandez, few of support to his wife
end children, all of whom suffered lose offove, affection, care, comfort,
s. wasrouce on fAMhteoics CALLED?
YES pTi NOJ— society, companionship, and guidance of their father and husband,
«. IF PHYSICIAN WAS VIMTEO OUE TO OUUftY. WUUDE 0 ATE Of FIRST VlSrT AK0 Gerardo I. Hernandez.
PHY$ K1AN3NW,IE, ADDRESS ANDPHONEHUMBEfc-
TOTAL DAMAGES TO DATE: TOTAL ESTlMATfO PROSPECTIVE
Qj ES MSNME DW.WCES:
Dr. lav) furai
PHYSIOAIfS ADDRESS pwii $ estimated $25 million + t
LAC/Harbor-UCLA Med Ctr, 1000 W. Carson St 1(310) 222-1912

Carson, CA 90502 THIS CLAIM MUST BE S/GiUSD
NOTE! PRESENTATION OF A FALSE CLAIM ISA FELONY (PENAL CODE SECTION72)
WARNING
- CLAIMS FOR DEATH, INJURY TO PERSON OR TO PERSONAL PROPERTY MUSTBE FILED NOT LATER THAN 6 MONTHS AFTER THE
OCCURENCE. (GOVERNMENTCODE SECTION 911.2)
• ALL OTHER CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES MUST BE F/LED NOT LATER THANONE YEAR AFTER THE OCCURRENCE. (GOVERNMENT* CODE
SECTION 911.2)
- SUBJECTTO CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS, YOU HAVE ONLY SIX(6) MONTHS FROM THE OATEOF THE WRITTEN NOTICEOF REJECTION
OF YOUR CLAIM TO FILE A COURT ACTION, (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 945.9)
- IF WRITTEN NOTICE OF RE/ECrtONOF YOUR CLAIM IS NOT GIVEN, YOU HAVE TWO (Z)YEARS FROM ACCRUAL fFTHE CAUSE OF ACTION
TO FILEA COURTACTION. (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 945.4)
14 PfiWT 08 TYPE NAME OATE IS. SKfMfUREOFt fflliA OH HIS/HEft SCrtALFaKiHS"
AElATKWSHtPI
MICHAEL ALDER 04/16/14 Attorney for Claimants
7 ^S1 ftMUHw.
•
Attachment A
Additional Clamiants: '
1. Luis 6. Hernandez - DOB: 2/12/1999; Social Security #:WBSBBt

. 2, StephaoielVL Hernandez-DOB: 7f$120021 Social Security#:
•y
ATTACHMENT B
What particular ACT orOMISSION do you cfafm caused the injury or damage? Please give
names of City employees causing the injury or damage and identity any vehicles involved
by license plate number, if known. •
The City of Los Angeles, including but not limited to the Los Angeles World Airport
(LAWA), the Airport Police at Los Angeles World Airport, and other City of Los Angeles
agencies, failed to properiy hire, supervise, train, staff, and plan for the protection and
safety of individuals and personnel at Los Angeles fntematfonal Airport. Further, City of
Los Angeles employees failed in the performance of their duties which created a
dangerous lapse in security that allowed Gerardo Ismael Hernandez to be fatally shot and
killed at Terminal 3 of Los Angeles International Airport by Paul Ciancta. Further, City of
Los Angeles employees prevented and/br delayed medical care to be properly and/or
timely administered to injured people. As a direct result of the wrongful acts and omissions
of its-officers, directors, employees and agents, claimants suffered damages.
i
oLSS^Js.
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
mt
fHcr:
ftCS®
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
h\ + 648 KENNETH HAHN HALL OF ADMINISTRATION
'h
SCO WEST TEMPLE STREET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012-2713 TELEPHONE
(213) 974-1913
FACSIMILE
JOHN F. KRATTLl
(213) 687-8822
County Counsel April 22,2014
TDD
(213) 633-0901
Michael Alder, Esq.

ALDER LAW P.C.
1840 Century Park East, 15th Fir.
Los Angeles, California 90067
Re: Claim(s) Presented: April 17,2014

File Number(s): 14-1113671*001
Your Client(s): Ana Machuca
Dear Counselor:
This letter is to inform you that the above-referenced claim, which you
presented to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, was rejected on
April 18,2014.
A preliminary investigation fails to indicate any involvement on the part

of the County of Los Angeles, its officers, agents, or employees. Accordingly,
your claim was rejected on that basis.
STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT YOU BE GIVEN THE FOLLOWING

"WARNING":
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only (6) months from the date this
notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file a court action on
this claim. See Government Code section 945.6.
IIOA.1061445.1
Michael Alder, Esq.
Page 2
This time limitation applies only to causes of action for which

Government Code sections 900 - 915.4 require you to present a claim. Other
causes of action, including those arising under federal law, may have different
time limitations.
Very truly yours,
JOHN F. KRATTLI
County Counsel
/
By
OANNE NIELSEN
Principal Deputy County Counsel
General Litigation Division
JNice
HOA.1061445.1
4
i PROOF OF SERVICE
2 File No. 14-1113671*001
3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Los Angeles:
4 Carolyn Edwards states: I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California,
over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within action. My business address is 648
5 KennethHahn Hall of Administration, 500 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, California 90012-
2713
6
That on Apri «c?5 2014,1 served the attached
7
NOTICE OF DENIAL LETTER
8
îpon4nterested-Partyês) by-pk6mg-El • the-er-igtnal • d-a-trae-eepy thereof-enolosed-in-a seated
9 envelope addressed 13 as follows • as stated on the attached service list:
10 Michael Alder, Esq.

ALDER LAW P.C.
11 1840 Century Park East, 15th Fir.
12
By United States mail. I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to
13 the persons at the addresses on the attached service list (specify one):
(1) • deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the
14 postage fully prepaid.
15 (2) SI placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following ordinary business
practices. I am readily familiar with this business's practice for collecting and
16 processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is
placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business
17 with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully
prepaid.
18
I am a resident or employed in the county where the mailing occurred. The
19 envelope or package was placed in the mail at Los Angeles, California:
20 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct ^
21
Executed on AprilÔ, 2014,
2 atLos AngelesrCjialifomia.
22
23
Carolvn Edwards
24 (NAME OF DECLARANT) ')
25
26
27
28
HQA.1036216.1
*>
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
m 6 4 8 K B N N E T H HAHN HALL OF A D M I N I S T R A T I O N
'i -i
500 WEST TEMPLB STREET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012-2713 TELEPHONE
(213)974-1913
FACSIMILE
JOHN F. KRATTLI
(213) 687-8822
TDD
(213) 633-0901
Michael Alder, Esq.

ALDER LAW P.C.
1840 Century Park East, 15* Fir.
Re: Claiiii(s) Presented: April 17,2014

File Number(s): 14-1113671*002
Your CIient(s): Luis Hernandez
Dear Counselor:
April IS, 2014.


"WARNING":
1IOA.1061442.1
Michael Alder, Esq.
Page 2

time limitations.
Very truly yours.
JOHNF. KRATTLI
County Counsel
B
'ANNE NIELSEN
JN:ce
HOA.1061442.1
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2 File No, 14-1113671*002
5 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration, 500 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, California 90012-
2713
6
That on Aprilffi1^2014,1 served the attached
7
8
. .upon Interested Party(ies) by placing-.D the original. IS a true copy thereof.enclosed in.a sealed.
9 envelope addressed E as follows • as stated on the attached service list;

ALDER LAW P.C. k
12
By United States mail I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to
13 the persons at the addresses on the attached service list (speciiy one):
(1) Q deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the
15 (2) IS placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following ordinary business
prepaid.
18
I am a resident or employed in the county where the mailing occurred. Hie
19 envelope or package was placed in the mail at Los Angeles, California:
20 I declare under penalty of peijury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct .
21
Executed on ApriK2j5 2014, at Los AngelesrCalifbmia.
22
23
Carolvn Edwards
24 (NAME OF DECLARANT) (SIGl iFDEOL
25
26
27
28
HOA.1036216.1
oLk
Fm
\M& OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
l+l 6 4 8 KENNETH HAHN HALL OF ADMINISTRATION
$ Hi
5 0 0 WEST TEMPLE S T R E E T
.•^rnmWx. TELEPHONE
t O S ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9 0 0 1 2 - 2 7 1 3
(213) 974-1913
FACSIMILE
JOHNF. KRATTLI
(213) 687-8822
TDD
(213) 633-0901
Michael Alder, Esq.

ALDER LAW P.C.
1840 Century Park East, 15lh Fir.
Re: Claim(s) Presented: April 17,2014

File Number(s); 14-1113671*003
Your Client(s): Stephanie Hernandez
Dear Counselor:
April 18,2014.


"WARNING":
HOA1061436.1
Michael Alder, Esq.
Page 2

time limitations.
. Very truly yours.
JOHN F. KRATTLI
County Counsel
By
,UuaW>ii.lija» ^
JOANNE NIELSEN .
JNxe
HOA.1061436.1
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2 File No. 14-1113671*003
5 Kenneth HaJbn Hall of Administration, 500 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, California 90012-
2713
6
That on April1^^2014,1served the attached
7
8
upon-Interested Party(ies) by placing-O the original- M a Iruexopy thereof enclosed in a sealed
9 envelope addressed SI as follows • as stated on the attached service list:

ALDER LAW P.C.
12
By United States mail. I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to
13 the persons at the addresses on the attached service list (specify one):
(1) •' deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the
15 (2) IS placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following ordinary business
prepaid.
18
I am a resident or employed in the county where the mailing occurred. The
19 envelope or package was placed in the mat! at Los Angeles, California:
20 I declare under penalty of pequry under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
21
Executed on April {7^2014, at Los Angele^Califomia,
22
23
Carolyn Edwards
24 (NAME OF DECLARANT) (SIG] OFDECL
25
26
27
28
HOA.103©16.1

TSA Agent Death Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TSA Agent Death Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

TSA Agent Death Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Decedent, Gerardo Ismael Hernandez, and for causes of

2 actions against Defendants, LOS ANGELES WORLD AIRPORTS, CITY OF LOS

3 ANGELES, THE AIRPORT POLICE AT LOS ANGELES, LOS ANGELES POLICE

4 DEPARTMENT, LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, and

7 1. Plaintiff, Ana Z. Machuca ("Plaintiff1 or "Plaintiffs") is the surviving wife of

9 County of Los Angeles, State of California.

10 2. Plaintiffs, Luis G. Hernandez and Stephanie M. Hernandez ("Plaintiff' or

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

18 is a governmental and public entity, and/or a municipal corporation or political subdivision

20 California, United States.

22 were LAWA, City, LAWAPD, LAXPD, LAPD, and/or County officers/agents/employees

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

11 of their co-Defendants failed to follow Defendants' instructions, directions, procedures, and

b 12 policies. Their actions and/or inactions caused injury to Plaintiffs.

19 their co-Defendants failed to follow Defendants' instructions, orders, directions, procedures,

20 and policies. Their actions and/or inactions caused injury to Plaintiffs.

22 partnership, associate, or otherwise, of DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, are unknown to

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

10 events herein alleged.

19 management, and operation, of their respective agencies, departments and duties.

21 approximately 9:20 a.m. on November 1,2013, when Transportation Security Administration

23 International Airport ("LAX") by Paul Ciancia ("Ciancia").

26 and hundreds of additional rounds of ammunition. Ciancia walked up to a TSA checkpoint,

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

5 violation of Defendants' instructions, orders, directions, policies, and procedures.

18 supervise personnel to assess emergency situations so as to properly and timely secure

26 attention. Defendants wrongfully, negligently, intentionally, and/or with a deliberate

2 contributing factor in Hernandez's death.

11 inadequate emergency response training to respond effectively to active shooter scenarios,

5 If 16 standardized approaches to response times for incidents; a failure to implement

19 closed-circuit TVs; a lack of definitive standards of operating procedures between law

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

24 aid to Decedent and securing the facility possible.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

2 and inadequate radio communications and interoperability between Defendants. Further,

16 response time, and update antiquated equipment and services.

22 duties owed to Plaintiffs include but are not limited to:

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

3 Management Department did not communicate with each other more

5 Defendants failed to timely notify each other of the incident at LAX;

6 There was inadequate interaction between Defendants, LAWA, City,

7 LAWAPD, LARD, LAFD and County;

8 LAWA's, City's, LAWAPD's, LAPD's, LAFD's and County's allocation and

9 utilization of resources was deficient;

10 LAWAPD failed to participate in antiterrorist committees and task forces with

19 bulletins resulted in LAWAPD officers lack of knowledge of updated LAPD

20 policy and procedures;

21 LAWAPD Emergency Services Unit's ("ESU") missions were not clearly

22 delineated leading to a tendency of ESU to respond to a tactical situation as

24 LAPD SWAT team;

25 There is a nonexistent and/or deficient policy governing deployment of certain

26 weapons and munitions;

27 There was a lack of coordinated training and intelligence gathering activities

28 between Defendants, LAWA, City, LAWAPD, LAPD, LAFD, and County;

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

2 for active shooter scenarios;

4 LARD, LAFD, and County;

22 preceding paragraph as though fully set forth herein.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES