Royster

Royster v. Montanez

Good Law
134 Cal. App. 3d 362·184 Cal. Rptr. 560·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 1778
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 27, 1982Civ. 62764California3,393 words

Opinion

Opinion

Potter, J.

Plaintiff Betsy Royster appeals from a summary judgment in favor of defendant Miguel Montanez in her action for damages against him for personal injuries incurred when plaintiff stepped in a hole on premises occupied by defendant as his home.

The summary judgment was granted on the sole ground that the exclusive remedy for plaintiff’s injuries, incurred in the course of her employment, is an award of workers’ compensation.

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment was supported by a memorandum of points and authorities and by his declaration. The memorandum of points and authorities stated that plaintiff was “secretary to and employee of defendant Miguel Montanez doing business as Pronto Drilling,” and that defendant requested that “plaintiff, in her capacity as his secretary,” make the necessary arrangements for payment of an unpaid bill. The declaration of defendant in support of the motion stated that on the day of her injury, plaintiff “was employed by my company, Pronto Drilling, as a secretary/clerk/girl-Friday and had been so employed for several weeks prior thereto”; that after being requested to “make payment for me of a utility bill,” plaintiff came to…

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.