This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
Premises Liability
Worksite Accident

Dannie Salas v. C. Overaa & Co., Edward W. Scott Electric Co. Inc., and Does 1-100

Published: Oct. 2, 2020 | Result Date: Aug. 3, 2020 | Filing Date: Dec. 14, 2016 |

Case number: CGC-16-555913 Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

Ethan P. Schulman

Court

San Francisco County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Richard L. Frischer
(Lamb & Frischer Law Firm LLP)

Bryan D. Lamb
(Lamb & Frischer Law Firm LLP)


Defendant

David A. Harris
(Santana & Vierra) for Edward W. Scott Electric Co. Inc.


Facts

Defendant C. Overaa, a general contractor company entered into a contract with San Francisco Unified School District to renovate Willie Brown Jr. Middle School. Overaa contracted with defendant Edward W. Scott Electric Co., a subcontractor company to perform electrical work during the renovations. Subsequently, EWS subcontracted with defendant PCD to provide an AV system for the project. Plaintiff Dannie Salas worked as an electrical installer for PCD. While working, plaintiff fell from a walkway ramp and sustained injuries to her left knee and ankle. Plaintiff sued defendants for negligence.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendants negligently set up plywood as walkways knowing it could not withstand the weight of an average sized person. Plaintiff contended that PCD did not control or set up the walkway. Further, plaintiff contended that the walkway ramp violated Cal Osha Title Section 8:1624.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendant EWS contended that since plaintiff was receiving workers' compensation benefits for his injuries, plaintiff was barred from suing EWS under "Privette v. Superior Court." Defendant also contended that it owed no duty of reasonable care to plaintiff. Finally, defendant contended that it did not control the means and methods of PCD's work.

Result

The court granted summary judgment in favor of defendant EWS.


#135578

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390