This decision reverses a summary judgment in favor of the owner and prime contractor and against the plaintiff, who worked for a demolition subcontractor. Plaintiff was injured by an unknown assailant in a walkway that the owner and prime had left unfenced to allow neighborhood residents access to a bus stop. The owner and prime exercised actual control over security… Read More
In this case involving a slip-and-fall on a sidewalk on defendant's property, the trial court erred in granting the defendant summary judgment under the trivial defect doctrine. Defendant failed to meet his initial burden of showing the discontinuity of pavement was a trivial defect, providing only a declaration that stated the conclusion that the separation was less than an inch… Read More
A shopping center landlord was not entitled to immunity from an independent contractor's personal injury suit under Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689 because the landlord did not hire the contractor. A shopping center tenant did. Also, the landlord did not delegate to the tenant the landlord's responsibility for maintaining in safe condition the portion of the premises… Read More
During construction of a development in South Lake Tahoe, a worker for a subcontractor slipped on an icy floor, falling from a ladder and injuring himself. This decision holds that the trial court granted defendant summary judgment based on the Privette doctrine which bars claims by an injured worker for an independent contractor against the hirer of that contractor. This… Read More
This decision reverses a JNOV and new trial order overturning a jury verdict for plaintiff in this slip and fall accident caused by liquid on the floor tile of the defendant restaurant. The plaintiff offered a reasonable explanation for how the ten foot long, ten inch wide strip of liquid got on the floor in a location leading past the… Read More
Under Civil Code 846, landowners are generally immune from liability for personal injuries suffered by persons entering their property for recreational use. There is an exception to that immunity if the plaintiff was "expressly invited rather than merely permitted to come upon the premises by the landowner." This decision holds that despite the statutory wording, immunity is lost if the… Read More
A store owner that holds its premises open to the public owes invitees a duty of care to keep the premises reasonably safe. A business that owns or leases only part of a larger business premises owes invitees a duty of care with regard to the entire premises, not just the part the business owns, leases or operates in. So,… Read More
Plaintiff was injured while jogging across defendant's property while in training to run a marathon. This case holds that jogging for that purpose is a use of the property for a recreational purpose, and so Civ. Code 846 immunized the owner of the property from liability for plaintiff's injuries. Read More
A governmental entity is liable for a dangerous condition of its property only if it has actual or constructive notice of the condition and doesn't fix it. The entity has constructive notice of a dangerous condition only if (1) the dangerous condition existed for a sufficient period of time before the plaintiff’s injury, and (2) it was sufficiently obvious that… Read More
Ordinarily, a person who hires an independent contractor is not liable for injuries suffered by the contractor's employees on the job. Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689. In Kinsman v. Unocal Corp. (2005) 37 Cal.4th 659, the court held that a landowner who hires an independent contractor can be held liable for injuries to workers caused by latent… Read More
A landowner does not owe invitees a duty to provide adequate onsite parking so that the invitee won't be exposed to risks from traffic on adjoining streets that the invitee must cross to access the landowner's property from available offsite parking. Both precedent (Vasilenko v. Grace Family Church (2017) 3 Cal.5th 1077) ad the Rowland factors weigh against such a… Read More
Gov. Code 835, which imposes liability on governmental entities for dangerous conditions of their property, does not impose liability for injury that may be caused by conditions of the property to someone who never came in contact with it. Here, plaintiff claimed that the unsanitary conditions of a downtown police station caused Wong, a policeman, to catch typhus. Plaintiff, who… Read More
Live Nation held a music festival with 65,000 attendees. Live Nation knew that illicit drug use by attendees was a significant risk and took some measures to prevent it and to provide hydration, security and medical care. This decision holds that Live Nation had a special relationship with the festival attendees and owed them a duty of care with respect… Read More
Although “health studios” are required to have an AED on the premises, a health studio’s landlord is not required to do so. Read More
Summary judgment was properly granted to a landlord on proof that experts could not tell what caused the fire that injured plaintiffs, thus negating the element of causation of plaintiffs’ negligence claims. Read More
A homeowner is not generally responsible for supervising a child invited to his property if the child is accompanied and supervised by a parent, although the homeowner can assume and/or relinquish that duty; here, where homeowner assumed the supervisory duty but then relinquished it to a grandparent who proceeded to let the child drown, homeowner was not liable for the… Read More
Leaseholder whose lease stated he would indemnify the lessor against claims “arising out of, in connection with, or involving the use or occupancy of the leased premises” was not obligated to indemnify lessor against an injury that occurred in the common area (here, the stairs), even though injured party was a worker climbing stairs with a bucket of soapy water… Read More
