What is Negligence?

The elements of any negligence cause of action are duty, breach of duty, proximate cause, and damages. Peredia v. HR Mobile Services, Inc. (2018) 25 Cal.App.5th 680, 687; Strong v. State of Cal. (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 1439, 1449; County of Santa Clara v. Atl. Richfield Co. (2006) 137 Cal.App.4th 292, 318.

“To establish liability in negligence, it is a fundamental principle of tort law that there must be a legal duty owed to the person injured and a breach of that duty which is the proximate cause of the resulting injury.&rdquo?; Jacoves v. United Merchandising Corp. (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 88, 114.

A fundamental element of any cause of action for negligence is the existence of a legal duty of care running from the defendant to the plaintiff. Taylor v. Elliott Turbomachinery Co. Inc. (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 564, 593.

Whether a duty of care exists is a question of law for the court. Strong v. State of Cal. (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 1439, 1449. “The issue of whether a legal duty exists is an issue of law, not an issue of fact for the jury.” Kentucky Fried Chicken of Cal., Inc. v. Super. Ct. (1997) 14 Cal.4th 814, 819.

“Primary assumption of risk arises where a plaintiff voluntarily participates in an activity or sport involving certain inherent risks; primary assumption of risk... bar[s] recovery because no duty of care is owed as to such risks.” West v. Sundown Little League of Stockton (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 351, 357 (internal quotations and citations omitted).

Nonetheless, a defendant has “a duty to use due care not to increase the risks to a participant over and above those inherent in the [activity].” Knight v. Jewett (1992) 3 Cal.4th 296, 315-316. An inherent risk is one that cannot be eliminated without altering the nature of the activity. Knight v. Jewett (1992) 3 Cal.4th 296, 317.

Children are an exception to negligence claims. Gonzales v. Davis (1925) 197 Cal. 256, 260 (five year old too young to be contributorily negligent); Ellis v. D’Angelo (1953) 116 Cal.App.2d 310, 315-317 (four year old cannot be negligent, as a matter of law).

In general, attorney’s fees are not recoverable in an ordinary action for negligence. Code Civ. Proc., § 1021.

Useful Resources for Negligence

Recent Rulings on Negligence

51-75 of 10000 results

WILLIAM LEYTON VS KAZUO SUZUKI

Analysis re: General Negligence CCP § 340.5 defines professional negligence as “a negligent action or omission … in the rendering of professional services.” “In this state negligence may be pleaded in general terms, and that is as true of malpractice cases as it is of other types of negligence cases.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

FRESHTA HAKIMI VS UHAUL, ET AL.

Plaintiff alleges claims for negligence and motor vehicle negligence. The FAC also seeks exemplary damages against both Robert Joseph Coronel and Roberta Coronel for punitive damages, based on Defendants’ conduct of attempting to flee the scene. Defendants move to strike the punitive damages claim, contending that the alleged facts are insufficient to support recovery of such a claim. Plaintiff has not filed a written opposition to the motion.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

CITY OF ROCKLIN V. LEGACY ADVENTURES – ROCKLIN

THE DEMURRER TO THE NEGLIGENT INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACT CAUSE OF ACTION WAS MOOTED BY THE VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF THAT CAUSE OF ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE. CROSS-DEFENDANTS BONSAI DESIGN, LLC’S AND ADVENTURE OPERATIONS, LLC’S MOTION TO STRIKE 1ST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT IS DENIED. THE MOTION TO STRIKE THE NEGLIGENT INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACT CAUSE OF ACTION WAS MOOTED BY THE VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF THAT CAUSE OF ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE. NO HEARING ON THESE MATTERS WILL BE HELD (LEWIS V.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

BUSBY FAMILY, LLC V. ZERVOS

First Cause of Action - Negligence.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

ROUSHAN BEGUM, MS. VS WEISS FAMILY PROPERTIES, LLC, ET AL.

procedural history Plaintiff filed the Complaint on July 24, 2020, alleging sixteen causes of action: FEHA disability discrimination FEHA disability harassment FEHA disability retaliation Failure to engage in good faith interactive process Failure to provide reasonable accommodations FEHA sex/gender harassment FEHA sex/gender discrimination FEHA sex/gender retaliation Failure to prevent discrimination, harassment and retaliation Negligent hiring and retention Nonpayment of wages Failure to indemnify

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

CALEB JAMES CHARLOW VS GO JUNK FREE AMERICA! INC

Plaintiff further alleges that Defendants negligently asked Plaintiff to assist them and while doing so, Defendants negligently dropped the desk on his hand, crushing it. Plaintiff asserts a single claim for negligence, for both Defendant’s alleged direct negligence and vicarious liability for the negligence of its employees. Defendant moves for summary judgment. EVIDENCE A. Evidence Submitted by Defendant in Support of Moving Papers 1.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ASATUR GALADJIAN, ET AL. VS INTER VALLEY ESCROW, INC., ET AL.

As the entity charged with recording the Deed of Trust (see TAC ¶ 10), plaintiffs’ allegations concerning Stewart Title are sufficient to allege negligence. (See Seeley v. Seymour (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 844, 860-862 [liability of title insurance company to property owner for negligent recording of document].) The demurrer to the first cause of action is OVERRULED.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CATALINA HERNANDEZ, ET AL. VS KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS, ET AL.

Plaintiffs allege Defendants committed negligence in providing Catalina prenatal, labor, delivery, and neonatal care while pregnant with Noemi, causing harm both. Ricardo also asserts a cause of action for loss of consortium. Defendants filed this Petition to compel arbitration on October 29, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Plaintiff alleges claims for professional negligence, lack of informed consent, medical battery and violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200, et seq. Defendants demur to the section 17200 claim, arguing that Plaintiff has not adequately standing under Business and Professions Code section 17204, has not adequately alleged a basis for restitution, and has not adequately alleged a basis for injunctive relief.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

ANNA IMOGEN ARROWSMITH VS PETER MARTOCCHIO, ET AL.

for negligent misrepresentation.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MATTHEW PALMER VS ELEVON RETAIL ASSOCIATION ET AL

BACKGROUND On July 13, 2018, plaintiff Matthew Palmer filed a complaint against Elevon Retail Association and Mar Ventures, Inc. for negligence/premises liability. Plaintiff alleges that on February 5, 2018, defendants owned the subject premises and plaintiff was a patron who was lawfully on the subject premises. Complaint, ¶5.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

KIMBERLY BOUSSARD VS CHARLES SHORTER

The motion is GRANTED as to plaintiff’s prayer for punitive damages under the 1st cause of action for negligence at para. 5. BACKGROUND On October 23, 2019, Kimberly Boussard filed a complaint against Charles Shorter for negligence. On December 23, 2019, plaintiff filed a FAC for (1) negligence, (2) private nuisance, (3) breach of warranty and habitability, (4) breach of implied covenant of quiet enjoyment, (5) IIED, and (6) violation of Civil Code §1942.4.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

RANCHO CIENEGA, LLC, ET AL. VS LEVI ESTATES, LLC,, ET AL.

As noted by Brokers in their moving papers, the factual basis for the breach of fiduciary duty cause of action against Brokers is the same as that for the negligence and breach of contract causes of action.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

CINDY COWAN VS BRADLEY J FRIEDMAN, MD, ET AL.

Plaintiff alleges claims for professional negligence, lack of informed consent, medical battery and violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200, et seq. Defendants demur to the section 17200 claim, arguing that Plaintiff has not adequately standing under Business and Professions Code section 17204, has not adequately alleged a basis for restitution, and has not adequately alleged a basis for injunctive relief.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

LYDIA ARNETT SEATON VS YUMMY FOODS, LLC

Nor may the owner be found to be negligent if, having exercised ordinary care, he discovered such a condition before the time of the injury, but not long enough before to provide him the time reasonably necessary to remedy the condition or to give reasonable warning or to provide reasonable protection.” (BAJI No. 8.20.) “The fact alone that a dangerous condition existed at the time the accident occurred will not warrant an inference that the defendant was negligent.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

BABAK PANAHPOUR VS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, A CORPORATION, ET AL.

Next, the Court agrees with Plaintiff’s contention that the claim for negligent misrepresentation should be given effect under Bock v. Hansen (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 215 (“Bock”). In Bock, the court held that a claim for negligent misrepresentation is actionable against an individual insurance adjuster. (Id. at 231.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

JAMES MARTIN MCDANIELS VS FORD MOTOR CO., ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Negligence; and Strict Products Liability. On August 5, 2019, the Court entered an order pursuant to a Stipulation to Strike Prayer for Punitive Damages. Defendant Ford Motor Company (hereinafter “Defendant”) moves for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication of the first cause of action for negligence and second cause of action for strict products liability.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

JERSON BARRIOS VS TELACU NW FIVE, 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, 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

    Jan 22, 2021

TOBIAS V. TOBIAS

Goldmine Ski Associates, Inc. (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 111, 119–120, 266 Cal.Rptr. 749 [complaint alleged owner negligently maintained ski slopes; plaintiff could not avoid summary judgment by showing owner negligently cared for her after accident]; Cochran v.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

JACQUELINE GIBSON VS BERNARD WINGFIELD, ET AL.

On January 29, 2019, Plaintiff Jacqueline Gibson commenced this action for negligence and wrongful death against Defendants Southern California Regional Rail Authority dba Metrolink, National Railroad Passenger Corporation, and Richard Wingfield. On April 24, 2019, the Court found that cases 19STCV02988 and 19STCV03722 are related and designated 19STCV02988 as the lead case.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ALEJANDRO PULIDO VS BLUEMERCURY, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ET AL.

(7) negligent infliction of emotional distress.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

SHANE BELL VS HARRY B KRAM MD

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant negligently performed surgery on his leg and that Plaintiff had not provided informed consent for the surgery. Defendant moves for an order requiring Plaintiff to post an undertaking pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. § 1030.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

KAM LP, ET AL. VS YGRENE, INC, ET AL.

.: 18BBCV00220 Hearing Date: January 22, 2021 [TENTATIVE] order RE: demurreR; motion to strike On March 4, 2020, Cross-Complainant 23830 Hatteras LLC filed a First Amended Cross-Complaint (“FAXC”) for: (1)-(4) breach of contract; (5)-(8) negligence; (9)-(12) fraud; (13)-(16) negligent misrepresentation; and (17) declaratory relief.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ANTONIO CUEVAS VS MONTEREY PARK HOSPITAL, ET AL.

., and SK Surgical Services, Inc. on August 25, 2020, alleging a single cause of action for medical negligence (wrongful death). Plaintiff is the nephew of Decedent Agustin Alvarado (“Decedent”). Manuel Cuevas, Angela Cuevas, Jesus Alvarado, Maria Alvarado, and Rosa Alvarado are named as nominal defendants as nephews or siblings of Decedent.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MANUEL KAZANJIAN VS. ADRIEN VINCENT SEVERO, ET AL.

The complaint, filed January 23, 2018, alleges causes of action for: (1) breach of contract; (2) negligence; (3) fraud; (4) unjust enrichment; (5) breach of express warranty; (6) breach of implied warranty; and (7) claim against license bond. B. Relevant Background and Motion on Calendar On December 9, 2020, an OSC Re Dismissal (Settlement) came for hearing.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.