Negligent Entrustment of Motor Vehicle

Useful Rulings on Negligent Entrustment of Motor Vehicle

Recent Rulings on Negligent Entrustment of Motor Vehicle

CHARLES ALVAREZ, ET AL. VS AARON LEE RUSKIN, ET AL.

The complaint asserts a single cause of action for negligence against all defendants, based on the following separate theories of liability: (1) negligent operation of a motor vehicle; (2) respondeat superior based on an employment relationship between the driver and defendants; (3) ownership liability; (4) negligent entrustment; (5) respondeat superior based on an agency relationship between the driver and defendants.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

HAROLD FIGUEROA ET AL VS AT&T CORPORATION ET AL

The FAC asserts causes of action for (1) strict product liability – failure to warn, (2) negligence – product liability, (3) negligent entrustment, (4) negligent hiring and retention, (5) premises liability, (6) negligent provision of required safeguards, (7) negligence – peculiar risk of harm, (8) wrongful death, and (9) negligent infliction of emotional distress. The FAC alleges in pertinent part as follows. All Access and JLG manufacture and supply telescopic boom lifts.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

JOHN V. ROGERS, AN INDIVIDUAL VS ALAMO RENT-A-CAR, ET AL.

Negligent Entrustment Plaintiff alleges Enterprise was negligent in renting a vehicle to Kim because Enterprise knew or should have known Kim was a reckless and incompetent driver. Liability for negligent entrustment arises where an automobile is entrusted to a driver whose incompetence, inexperience, or recklessness is known or should have been known to the owner.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

CYNTHIA ZABALA VS JAMES ALAN MOBLEY

In the complaint, Plaintiff alleges that on April 16, 2018, Defendants James Mobley and Does 1-25: (a) operated a motor vehicle; (b) employed the persons who operated a motor vehicle in the course of their employment; (c) owned the motor vehicle which was operated with their permission; (d) entrusted the motor vehicle; and (e) were the agents and employees of the other defendants and acted within the scope of the agency when James Mobley caused injuries to Plaintiff near the intersection of Santa Monica Boulevard

  • Hearing

    Jun 25, 2020

ELVIA MATA VS THELMA CABAL ET AL

Defendants argues that similarly they can not be liable under a theory of negligent entrustment. One who “entrusts” a motor vehicle to another whom they know, or should know, is incompetent or unfit to drive may be liable for injuries inflicted by the driver that were proximately caused by the driver’s incompetence. (Lindstrom v. Hertz Corp. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 644, 648.) The negligence at issue thus turns on the knowledge of the owner. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 23, 2020

FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY V. 101 MOTORS, LLC

Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 1055, it was established that rental car companies have no duty to conduct an electronic search of customers’ records before entrusting a vehicle to them and that a rental car agency is not liable for negligent entrustment where the agency has fully complied with the requirements of sections 14604 and 14608, and the customer does not appear impaired or otherwise unfit to drive at the time of rental.

  • Hearing

    Jun 09, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

EDGARD SOTO VS EDUARDO SALAS ET AL

Failure to State Sufficient Facts Defendant argues that Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently plead negligent entrustment such that the demurrer should be sustained. Defendant’s argument is unavailing. As acknowledged by Defendant, Plaintiff has pled ownership liability against Defendant. Under California law, every owner of a motor vehicle is liable and responsible for injuries caused by an individual operating the vehicle with the owner’s permission. (See Cal. Vehicle Code, § 17150; Marquez v.

  • Hearing

    Mar 13, 2020

JULIAN GARCIA, ET AL. VS HEARTLAND EXPRESS, INC., ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Motor Vehicle Negligence, Negligent Entrustment, Negligent Hiring, Negligent Undertaking, Negligent Retention, Negligent Supervision, and Negligent Training; and Negligence Per Se.

  • Hearing

    Mar 11, 2020

JULIAN GARCIA, ET AL. VS HEARTLAND EXPRESS, INC., ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Motor Vehicle Negligence, Negligent Entrustment, Negligent Hiring, Negligent Undertaking, Negligent Retention, Negligent Supervision, and Negligent Training; and Negligence Per Se.

  • Hearing

    Mar 11, 2020

RAMON ROSALES SR ET AL VS ARON H PETROSIAN JR ET AL

(collectively, “The Petrosians”) and Does 1-100 for: Negligent/Reckless Operation of Motor Vehicle Resulting in Wrongful Death and Personal Injury; Negligent/Reckless Entrustment of Motor Vehicle to Minor Resulting in Wrongful Death and Personal Injury On July 25, 2017, this case was ordered transferred to this instant department, at the direction of Department 1. On September 11, 2017, this case was consolidated with Case No. BC611815 for all proceedings.

  • Hearing

    Mar 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

JULIAN GARCIA, ET AL. VS HEARTLAND EXPRESS, INC., ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Motor Vehicle Negligence, Negligent Entrustment, Negligent Hiring, Negligent Undertaking, Negligent Retention, Negligent Supervision, and Negligent Training; and Negligence Per Se. Defendant Heartland Express, Inc. of Iowa (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) seeks an order deeming the Requests for Admission, Set One served on Plaintiffs Julian, Erica, Xavier, Garcia, and Brianna (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”) admitted.

  • Hearing

    Mar 10, 2020

JULIAN GARCIA, ET AL. VS HEARTLAND EXPRESS, INC., ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Motor Vehicle Negligence, Negligent Entrustment, Negligent Hiring, Negligent Undertaking, Negligent Retention, Negligent Supervision, and Negligent Training; and Negligence Per Se. Defendant Heartland Express, Inc. of Iowa (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) seeks an order deeming the Requests for Admission, Set One served on Plaintiffs Julian, Erica, Xavier, Garcia, and Brianna (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”) admitted.

  • Hearing

    Mar 10, 2020

MARYAM PANOSYAN, ET AL. VS HRANT ELIASYAN, ET AL.

Plaintiffs alleged Enterprise owned the motor vehicle, which was operated with their permission. (FAC, pg. 4.) Plaintiffs alleged Eliasyan caused the motor vehicle accident in which Plaintiffs sustained injuries. (FAC, pg. 5.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

CLAUDIO RAGUCCI VS TURO INC ET AL

(“Defendant”) following a motor vehicle collision with co-Defendant Chia Yi Hung (“Hung”). Hung obtained the vehicle via a car-sharing application operated by Defendant. Defendant moves for summary judgment on Plaintiff’s complaint for negligent entrustment. Defendant’s separate statement of undisputed facts provides a sufficient basis to grant the motion. Moreover, the motion is unopposed. “The failure to file opposition creates an inference that the motion . . . is meritorious.” (Sexton v.

  • Hearing

    Feb 27, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

MALGORZATA JOHNSON V. CHRISTINE ANN VENARDOS, ET AL.

On August 12, 2019, Malgorzata Johnson (Plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against Defendants Christie Ann Venardos and Robert Ortiz alleging causes of action for (1) motor vehicle, against Ms. Venardos; (2) general negligence, against both Defendants; (3) negligent entrustment, against Mr. Ortiz; and (4) punitive damages, against Ms. Venardos. Plaintiff’s lawsuit stems from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on May 30, 2018 on Nacimiento Lake Drive, south of Steelhead Road. (Compl., ¶ 11.)

  • Hearing

    Feb 25, 2020

JOSE GUTIERREZ VS. ROBERT DE VRIES

The only evidence Brown plaintiffs offer in opposition to the motion is a letter, apparently from a claims representative for De Vries’ insurer blaming Caltrans for damage to the fence as a result of a motor vehicle accident in “2014 or 2015.”

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

LAVELL JONES VS TARGET CORPORATION, ET AL.

The complaint alleges motor vehicle negligence, negligence per se, and negligent entrustment, hiring, undertaking, retention, supervision, and training. The complaint is brought in relation to an automobile collision that occurred on November 18, 2017. On January 15, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion to quash a deposition subpoena pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1. Trial is set for April 28, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Feb 14, 2020

BLAKE NASH VS ABRAHAM BAE, ET AL.

.: 19STCV07423 Hearing Date: February 4, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: defendant’S motion for summary judgment BACKGROUND Plaintiff Blake Nash (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Abraham Bae and Grace Sunhae Bae (collectively, “Defendants”) following a motor vehicle collision on February 17, 2019. Grace Bae was the registered owner of the vehicle that collided with Plaintiff’s vehicle.

  • Hearing

    Feb 04, 2020

BLAKE NASH VS ABRAHAM BAE, ET AL.

.: 19STCV07423 Hearing Date: February 4, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: defendant’S motion for summary judgment BACKGROUND Plaintiff Blake Nash (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Abraham Bae and Grace Sunhae Bae (collectively, “Defendants”) following a motor vehicle collision on February 17, 2019. Grace Bae was the registered owner of the vehicle that collided with Plaintiff’s vehicle.

  • Hearing

    Feb 04, 2020

RAMON ROSALES SR ET AL VS ARON H PETROSIAN JR ET AL

(collectively, “The Petrosians”) and Does 1-100 for: Negligent/Reckless Operation of Motor Vehicle Resulting in Wrongful Death and Personal Injury; Negligent/Reckless Entrustment of Motor Vehicle to Minor Resulting in Wrongful Death and Personal Injury On July 25, 2017, this case was ordered transferred to this instant department, at the direction of Department 1. On September 11, 2017, this case was consolidated with Case No. BC611815 for all proceedings.

  • Hearing

    Jan 31, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

YOUNG CHAI JEONG VS MYLES JAMIESON ET AL

In the absence of evidence, the Court cannot simply assume that the Plaintiff will not be able to prove negligent entrustment or negligent maintenance. As the express language of 49 U.S.C. § 30106 makes clear, the Graves Amendment does not bar claims based on the direct negligence of the car rental company; it bars only claims for vicarious liability. Plaintiff alleges direct liability theories against Defendant that have not been addressed in the motion.

  • Hearing

    Jan 24, 2020

MARTIN BALMACEDA VS ZHICHENG LIU ET AL

To state a cause of action for negligent entrustment against Defendants, Plaintiff must prove that: (1) Liu negligently operated a vehicle owned by Defendants; (2) Defendants knew or should have known that Liu was incompetent or unfit to drive the vehicle; (3) Defendants permitted Liu to use the vehicle anyway; and (4) Liu’s incompetence or unfitness harmed Plaintiff. (Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. Superior Court (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 853, 863-864.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2020

KAREN BEHRNDT VS LAWRENCE FARWELL

In her complaint filed on September 17, 2019, plaintiff Karen Behrndt alleges that defendants Lawrence Farwell; EAN Holdings, LLC (“EAN”); and Enterprise Rent-a-Car of Los Angles, LLC (“Enterprise”), operated the motor vehicle, employed the persons who operated it; owned the motor vehicle that was operated with their permission; entrusted the motor vehicle; were agents and employees of the other defendants and acted within the scope of the agency; and negligently and carelessly serviced, repaired, maintained

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2020

SARAH KARY, AN INDIVIDUAL VS DART INTERNATIONAL, A CORPORATION, ET AL.

., and Carlos Luna for motor vehicle negligence, general negligence, and negligent entrustment arising out of a January 31, 2019 collision. On August 1, 2019, Defendant served Special Interrogatories, Set One, Forms Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Production of Documents, Set One. Plaintiff requested, and was granted, three extensions of time to respond. On November 4, 2019, defense counsel wrote Plaintiff’s counsel asking for the responses. Plaintiff’s counsel did not respond.

  • Hearing

    Jan 06, 2020

JULIO A BLAS VS VIDEN W PALUCHO ET AL

Blas alleges that he was injured in a motor vehicle accident as a result of the negligence of Defendants Viden W. Palucho and Israel Carrillo. (Defendant R.C. Trucking, Inc. (substituted in as Doe 1) has been dismissed). Defendants have moved for summary judgment, contending that the undisputed evidence establishes that neither defendant was negligent as a matter of law and that no negligent act or omission by either defendant was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s injuries.

  • Hearing

    Jan 02, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 16     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.