During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.
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
