What is Gross Negligence?

Gross negligence is pleaded by alleging the traditional elements of negligence: duty, breach, causation, and damages. However, to set forth a claim for gross negligence the plaintiff must allege extreme conduct on the part of the defendant. Rosencrans v. Dover Images, Ltd. (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 1072, 1082.

Gross negligence long has been defined in California and other jurisdictions as either: a ‘want of even scant care’ or ‘an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of conduct.’ City of Santa Barbara v. Super. Ct., 41 Cal.4th 747, 754 (2007). Gross negligence is not the same as ordinary negligence, which “consists of a failure to exercise the degree of care in a given situation that a reasonable person under similar circumstances would employ to protect others from harm.” Id. at 753-754.

To avoid a finding of gross negligence, it is not required that a public entity must pursue all possible options. It is required only that they exercise some care, that they pursue a course of conduct which is not an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of conduct. Decker v. City of Imperial Beach, 209 Cal.App.3d 349, 361 (1989). However, gross negligence immunity does not apply where an act of gross negligence by a public entity is the proximate cause of the injury. Gov’t Code § 831(c)(1)(E).

California does not recognize a distinct common law cause of action for gross negligence apart from negligence. Jimenez v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc., 237 Cal.App.4th 546, 552 (2015).

Useful Rulings on Gross Negligence

Recent Rulings on Gross Negligence

XIAOXING ZHANG VS ZHE ZHANG, ET AL.

Proof of negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness is insufficient to warrant an award of punitive damages. (Dawes v. Sup.Ct. (Mardian) (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82, 88–89.) Punitive damages may be recovered in an action for negligence or other nonintentional torts if the plaintiff pleads and proves that the defendant acted with the state of mind described as “conscious disregard” of the potential dangers to others. (Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc.¿(2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1270, 1299.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

BAHRAM JARIDIAN VS SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC., ET AL.

“Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient to justify such an award” for punitive damages. (Kendall Yacht Corp. v. United California Bank (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 949, 958.) Defendant moves to strike Plaintiff’s punitive damages request. (Motion to Strike, p. 2:5-8.) Defendant argues that Plaintiff has not pled a viable fraud claim that can support a punitive damages claim. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

DAISY COVARRUBIAS, ET AL. VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC, ET AL.

Proof of negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness is insufficient to warrant an award of punitive damages. (Dawes v. Sup.Ct. (Mardian) (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82, 88–89.) Punitive damages may be recovered in an action for negligence or other nonintentional torts if the plaintiff pleads and proves that the defendant acted with the state of mind described as “conscious disregard” of the potential dangers to others. (Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1270, 1299.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Proof of negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness is insufficient to warrant an award of punitive damages. (Dawes v. Sup.Ct. (Mardian) (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82, 88–89.) Punitive damages may be recovered in an action for negligence or other nonintentional torts if the plaintiff pleads and proves that the defendant acted with the state of mind described as “conscious disregard” of the potential dangers to others. (Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1270, 1299.)

  • Hearing

DAVID BABAIE, ET AL. VS TRANS WEST INVESTIGATIONS, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

“Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient to justify such an award” for punitive damages. (Kendall Yacht Corp. v. United California Bank (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 949, 958.) Defendant argues that the request for punitive damages should be stricken because the FAC “fails to allege any conduct which can meet the definition of malice, oppression or fraud.” (Motion to Strike, p. 8:26-27.)

  • Hearing

CYRUS CHADY VS PEDRAM SHAMEKH ET AL

Proof of negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness is insufficient to warrant an award of punitive damages. (Dawes v. Sup.Ct. (Mardian) (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82, 88–89.) Punitive damages may be recovered in an action for negligence or other nonintentional torts if the plaintiff pleads and proves that the defendant acted with the state of mind described as “conscious disregard” of the potential dangers to others. (Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1270, 1299.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Proof of negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness is insufficient to warrant an award of punitive damages. (Dawes v. Sup.Ct. (Mardian) (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82, 88–89.) Punitive damages may be recovered in an action for negligence or other nonintentional torts if the plaintiff pleads and proves that the defendant acted with the state of mind described as “conscious disregard” of the potential dangers to others. (Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1270, 1299.)

  • Hearing

CAROL ANN HOWARD AS TRUSTEE OF THE ANDREW MILLS TRUST VS ALBENCE & ASSOCIATES APC

As to Plaintiff's fifth cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty, sixth causes of action for elder abuse – financial, and eighth cause of action for gross negligence against all three Defendants, summary adjudication is granted. As to the fifth cause of action, Plaintiff alleges Defendants owed a fiduciary duty to the Trustee of the Trust as attorneys for Mr.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JOE RELEFORD VS POSTMATES INC, ET AL.

“Where a plaintiff relies upon [willful] misconduct[,] there are sound reasons why he should be required to state the facts more fully than in ordinary negligence cases so that it may be determined whether they do constitute [willful] misconduct rather than negligence or gross negligence.” (Snider v. Whitson (1960) 184 Cal.App.2d 211, 214.) Plaintiff alleges the following in the FAC.

  • Hearing

JOE RELEFORD VS POSTMATES INC, ET AL.

“Where a plaintiff relies upon [willful] misconduct[,] there are sound reasons why he should be required to state the facts more fully than in ordinary negligence cases so that it may be determined whether they do constitute [willful] misconduct rather than negligence or gross negligence.” (Snider v. Whitson (1960) 184 Cal.App.2d 211, 214.) Plaintiff alleges the following in the FAC.

  • Hearing

ADRIAN MADDEN VS GURUCUL SOLUTIONS, LLC

“Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient to justify such an award” for punitive damages. (Kendall Yacht Corp. v. United California Bank (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 949, 958.) B. Discussion Defendant moves to strike the following portions of the FAC: · “Page 13, ln. 22 (‘Request for Punitive Damages’) on the ground that the FAC fails to allege facts sufficient to support an award of punitive damages.” (Motion, p. 1:23-24.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ADRIAN MADDEN VS GURUCUL SOLUTIONS, LLC

“Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient to justify such an award” for punitive damages. (Kendall Yacht Corp. v. United California Bank (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 949, 958.) B. Discussion Defendant moves to strike the following portions of the FAC: · “Page 13, ln. 22 (‘Request for Punitive Damages’) on the ground that the FAC fails to allege facts sufficient to support an award of punitive damages.” (Motion, p. 1:23-24.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

DON BRIAN OLSON VS TINA MARTINOVSKI, ET AL.

“Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient to justify such an award” for punitive damages. (Kendall Yacht Corp. v. United California Bank, 50 Cal. App. 3d 949, 958 (1975).) The allegations supporting a request for punitive damages must be alleged with specificity; conclusory allegations without sufficient facts are not enough. (Smith v. Superior Court, 10 Cal. App. 4th 1033, 1041-1042 (1992).)

  • Hearing

NUTRIBULLET, LLC, ET AL. VS ACKER & WHIPPLE

While the FAC may allege negligence, or even gross negligence, plaintiffs allege no facts that defendant’s conduct was “willful” or “despicable.” GRANTED. Plaintiffs may move to restore punitive damages claim if evidence shows defendant’s acts constitute malice, fraud or oppression. DUE TO THE ONGOING COVID-19 PANDEMIC, PARTIES AND COUNSEL ARE ENCOURAGED TO APPEAR VIA LA COURT CONNECT.

  • Hearing

AFM & SAG-AFTRA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS DISTRIBUTION FUND VS STARR INDEMNITY & LIABILITY COMPANY

(PSS ¶ 7; Exhibit 2 (Crabtree Depo at pp. 55:15-24, 108:3-17) Pursuant to the Declaration of Trust, the Trust is required to indemnify the trustees for “any error of judgment or for any loss arising out of any act or omission in the execution of their duties so long as they act in good faith and without gross negligence[.]” (PSS ¶ 8; Exhibit 1 (Declaration of Trust) at p. 5.) All trustees have specialized knowledge in the music industry which helps them act as trustees for the Trust. (PSS ¶¶ 77-83.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

KRAFVE VS. KARFVE

Thus, in paragraphs 92, and 118 plaintiff alleges and defendant’s acts were done intentionally and maliciously and constituted the highest level of negligence, and gross negligence which was done with the purpose and intent to of causing plaintiff “to suffer physical injury, severe emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, mental and emotional distress and anxiety.”

  • Hearing

LA LEGENDS LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS LOS ANGELES IMMANUEL MISSION CHURCH, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

“Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient to justify such an award” for punitive damages. (Kendall Yacht Corp. v. United California Bank (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 949, 958.) B.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LEE VS TWO BUNCH PALMS HEARING RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY

A release is unenforceable, as a matter of public interest, to contract against liability for gross negligence. (City of Santa Barbara v. Superior Court (2007) 41 Cal.4th 747, 777; Hass v. RhodyCo Productions (2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 11, 31). The difference between ordinary and gross negligence is one of degree, not of kind, (Gore v.

  • Hearing

ANGELICA ARNADO, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL. VS 901 SOUTH BROADWAY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

Proof of negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness is insufficient to warrant an award of punitive damages. (Dawes v. Sup.Ct. (Mardian) (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82, 88–89.) Punitive damages may be recovered in a personal injury action if the plaintiff pleads and proves that the defendant acted with the state of mind described as “conscious disregard” of the potential dangers to others. (Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1270, 1299.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

P O VS LOS ANGELES ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL.

negligence, reckless misconduct, or a conscious flagrant indifference to the rights or safety of the individual harmed by the teacher; and (5) the harm was not caused by the teacher operating a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft, or other vehicle for which the State requires the operator or the owners of the vehicle, craft, or vessel to— (A) possess an operator’s license; or (B) maintain insurance.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

EULICES JIMENEZ VS BIO-NUTRACEUTICALS, INC., ET AL.

“Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient to justify such an award” for punitive damages. (Kendall Yacht Corp. v. United California Bank (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 949, 958.) Defendant argues that the request for punitive damages is plead in a conclusory manner. (Motion to Strike, p. 4:6-7.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

REBECCA Q. KRIEF VS BIRD RIDES, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, D/B/A BIRD, ET AL.

Demurrer – Gross Negligence “. . . California does not recognize a distinct cause of action for ‘gross negligence’ independent of a statutory basis.” (Eriksson v. Nunnink (2011) 191 Cal.App.4th 826, 856, n. 18 [citation and quotation omitted].) The Court finds the demurrer is properly sustained as to Plaintiff’s gross negligence cause of action. Gross negligence is not a cause of action.

  • Hearing

EULICES JIMENEZ VS BIO-NUTRACEUTICALS, INC., ET AL.

“Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient to justify such an award” for punitive damages. (Kendall Yacht Corp. v. United California Bank (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 949, 958.) Defendant argues that the request for punitive damages is plead in a conclusory manner. (Motion to Strike, p. 4:6-7.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

ANTHONY XEPOLIS VS TOKIO MARINE AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY

Proof of negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness is insufficient to warrant an award of punitive damages. (Dawes v. Sup.Ct. (Mardian) (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82, 88–89.) Punitive damages may be recovered in an action for negligence or other nonintentional torts if the plaintiff pleads and proves that the defendant acted with the state of mind described as “conscious disregard” of the potential dangers to others. (Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1270, 1299.)

  • Hearing

PRIMO DEJESUS VS GER JONES, ET AL.

Plaintiff lists the following “causes of action” on the caption page of his complaint: X Counts of Contract Violation(s), X Counts Gross Negligence with Reckless Disregard and Deliberate Indifference, Real Estate Fraud/Theft in excess of a 30 million dollar estate, Betrayal & Refusal to give Loyalty to their partner, Conspiracy, Green card abuse, XX counts State non-profit rules/laws violation(s) that in turn directly turned our church into a Cult, Elder Monetary abuse, age discrimination, Church board election

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 71     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.