Nava

Nava v. McMillan

Good Law
123 Cal. App. 3d 262·176 Cal. Rptr. 473·1981 Cal. App. LEXIS 2110
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 31, 1981Civ. 59683California2,038 words

Opinion

Opinion

Beach, J.

Plaintiff appeals from an order of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained defendants Nelson’s and Sarkozy’s demurrer to the first amended complaint, without leave to amend. We affirm.

Background:

Plaintiff Lorraine Nava, a teenaged minor, through her guardian ad litem brought a personal injury action against defendants Yvonne McMillan, Elma Nelson, Alexander M. Robertson, and Julius Sarkozy. In the first cause of action of her “First Amended Complaint for Personal Injuries (Negligence, Strict Liability),” plaintiff alleged that on February 14, 1978, she sustained injuries after being struck, while a pedestrian on Burnet Avenue in the County of Los Angeles, by an automobile negligently driven by defendant McMillan. In her second and third causes of action, plaintiff alleged that she stepped from the sidewalk into the street, causing her to be hit by the McMillan vehicle, after being frightened by dogs “of a vicious disposition” which were kept behind a chain link fence on the respective properties of defendants Nelson and Sarkozy. Plaintiff alleged that the injuries she sustained after being struck by the McMillan vehicle were the “direct and proximate result…

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.