Ontiveros

Ontiveros v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc.

Good Law
169 Cal. App. 4th 424·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 2445·86 Cal. Rptr. 3d 767
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 19, 2008B201336California4,247 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mosk, J.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff and appellant Susana Ontiveros (plaintiff) sustained personal injuries while exercising on a stairstep machine at a fitness center owned and operated by defendant and respondent 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. (defendant). She sued defendant, asserting, inter alia, a claim for strict product liability. The trial court granted defendant’s summary judgment motion as to that claim on the grounds that plaintiff acknowledged in her membership agreement that defendant could not be held liable for defective exercise equipment and that defendant provided “recreational services.”

On appeal, plaintiff contends that there are triable issues of fact concerning whether the dominant purpose of plaintiff’s transaction with defendant was for the use of defendant’s exercise machines or for the provision of fitness services. We hold that the undisputed evidence shows that the dominant purpose of plaintiff’s membership agreement with defendant was for the provision of fitness services and that as a result, defendant is not strictly liable to plaintiff under a product liability theory of recovery. We therefore affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Defendant’s…

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.