SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT 17
TENTATIVE RULING
Abel Montes, et al. vs. Young Men’s Christian Ass’n of Glendale, et al.
Case No.: BC688158
Hearing Date: July 9, 2020
YMCA’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
On December 26, 2017, Plaintiff Abel Montes aka Abel Montes Sr., Angela Reisner, and the Estate of Abel Montes Jr., by and through Alma Abel Montes, filed suit against the Young Men’s Christian Association of Glendale, California (YMCA), Eric Perrodin, National Council of Young Men’s Christian Associations of the United States of America, and YMCA of Glendale, alleging: (1) premises liability; (2) negligence, including negligent supervision; (3) continuation of decedent’s causes of action (survival action).
On December 10, 2018, YMCA’s motion for summary judgment was denied. On Appeal, the court reversed, based on a finding that there had not been a consideration of the threshold argument as to whether YMCA owed a legal duty to protec
Hearing Date
July 09, 2020
Type
Premises Liability (e.g.slip & fall) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT 17
TENTATIVE RULING
Abel Montes, et al. vs. Young Men’s Christian Ass’n of Glendale, et al.
Case No.: BC688158
Hearing Date: July 9, 2020
YMCA’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
On December 26, 2017, Plaintiff Abel Montes aka Abel Montes Sr., Angela Reisner, and the Estate of Abel Montes Jr., by and through Alma Abel Montes, filed suit against the Young Men’s Christian Association of Glendale, California (YMCA), Eric Perrodin, National Council of Young Men’s Christian Associations of the United States of America, and YMCA of Glendale, alleging: (1) premises liability; (2) negligence, including negligent supervision; (3) continuation of decedent’s causes of action (survival action).
On December 10, 2018, YMCA’s motion for summary judgment was denied. On Appeal, the court reversed, based on a finding that there had not been a consideration of the threshold argument as to whether YMCA owed a legal duty to protec