Sarjeant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES SARJEANT, et al., Case No. 24-cv-01216-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING CITY OF LONG

v. BEACH'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

FOSTER WHEELER LLC, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 203 Defendants.

The City of Long Beach’s motion for summary judgment is granted. This ruling assumes the reader’s familiarity with the facts, governing legal standards, and arguments made by the parties. Under the Privette doctrine, the City of Long Beach as the hirer is typically not liable for injuries sustained by an independent contractor or its workers, such as Sarjeant. Privette would not apply, however, if the City exercised “retained control” over Lipsett’s work in a manner that affirmatively contributed to Sarjeant’s injuries, or if the City should have known of the concealed preexisting hazardous condition on the Queen Mary and the contractor Lipsett did not know or could not have reasonably discovered it. See Gonzalez v. Mathis, 12 Cal. 5th 29, 38 (Cal. 2021) (describing the Privette exceptions). Sarjeant failed to put forth evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that either exception…