Carpenter

Carpenter v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 540·230 Cal. App. 3d 923·281 Cal. Rptr. 500·91 Daily Journal DAR 6263·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3913
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 28, 1991B047676California4,276 words

Opinion

Opinion

Goertzen, J.

Plaintiff/appellant George E. Carpenter (appellant) sued defendant/respondent the City of Los Angeles (City), for damages he suffered when he was shot by an unknown assailant allegedly in retaliation for having testified against a defendant in a preliminary hearing. The City successfully moved for summary judgment.

This appeal asks us to determine whether a city, through its police department, owes a duty to warn a witness, assisting in a criminal prosecution, about information it has received from a reliable source, regarding a threat to the witness’s life, after earlier assuring the witness that he had no cause for concern. For the reasons discussed below, we hold that such a duty is owed and that no statutory immunity bars this suit. As a triable issue exists regarding whether the City breached this duty, we reverse.

Facts

The facts are not in dispute. As related in various declarations and depositions filed in support of and in opposition to the motion for summary judgment, those facts show the following:

At pertinent times, appellant was employed by United Artist Theatres, Inc., at one of its movie theaters in North Hollywood. At about 12:45 a.m. on October 14,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.