Estate of Brian Griffin Lynn, Gail M. Lynn, Randy Lynn v. Ford Motor Company, et al.
Published: May 9, 2015 | Result Date: Mar. 18, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: CIVBS1200525 Summary Judgment – Defense
Court
San Bernardino Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
David L. Weisberg
(Office of the Los Angeles City Attorney)
John P. Kristensen
(Carpenter & Zuckerman)
Paul S. Zuckerman
(Carpenter, Zuckerman & Rowley)
Defendant
Frederick J. Ufkes
(Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP)
Facts
On Aug. 11, 2011, Abdul Formoli was involved in a head-on collision with Brian and Gail Lynn. Both Formoli and Brian Lynn succumbed to their injuries from the accident. The accident occurred three hours after Formoli had completed a temporary assignment, for Tatitlek Support Services Inc.
Formoli had been hired by Tatitlek to participate as a role player in an exercise conducted at Twentynine Palms Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Base from Aug. 7-11, 2011. Tatitlek hired role players as temporary employees.
The Estate of Brian Lynn, decedent's wife Gail Lynn and their son, Randy Lynn sued Tatitlek for negligence under a theory of respondeat superior. Tatitlek moved for summary judgment.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Citing Hinman v. Westinghouse Elec. Co. (1970) 2 Cal.3d 956, 962, plaintiffs alleged that the going and coming rule did not apply because Tatitlek benefited from locating its enterprise at a remote location from the local labor market and was therefore liable for trips incidental to its enterprise.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant argued that the accident occurred three hours after Formoli departed from Tatitlek's facility on the Marine Corps Base and was over 100 miles away from Tatitlek's facility on the Base. Tatitlek did not compensate any of its role players for travel time to and from its facility, but instead provided buses from certain locations. Formoli chose to drive himself to Tatitlek's facility.
Defendants contended that at the time the accident occurred, Formoli was not an employee of Tatitlek and was not engaged in any activity for benefit of Tatitlek or incidental to his employment with Tatitlek. Under these facts the going and coming rule applied to bar respondeat superior liability.
Result
Summary judgment for the defense. The court granted Tatitlek's Motion for Summary Judgment on the grounds that it had met its prima facie burden of showing that Formoli was not acting within the course and scope of his employment when the accident occurred. The court found that no master-servant relationship existed and that Formoli was not acting in the course and scope of his employment when the accident occurred.
Other Information
FILING DATE: Oct. 15, 2012.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390