Melendez

Melendez v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 321·63 Cal. App. 2d 1·63 Cal. App. 4th 1·73 Cal. Rptr. 2d 469·98 Daily Journal DAR 3769
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 14, 1998B104126California5,705 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

In October 1990, Adan Melendez was shot while attempting to obtain a refund for a ticket he had bought to an “underground” party that was broken up by police. He was one of many seeking refunds at the location where tickets to the concert had been sold. He was kicked by a security guard, then shot by another guard. His injuries are permanent and severe. Because the security guards were off-duty officers of the Los Angeles Police Department, an agency of the City of Los Angeles, he sued the city for damages. His wife sued for consortium damages. Both plaintiffs were successful, obtaining substantial verdicts that ripened into judgments. Their theories of recovery are barred by operation of Penal Code section 70, as we shall discuss. Because the bar of that statute applies, we must reverse the judgment against the city.

Factual and Procedural Summary

We must, of course, resolve all factual disputes in the case in favor of respondents, who were successful at trial, so long as that result is supported by substantial evidence. For the same reason, respondents are entitled to the benefit of all intendments that may be derived from the jury findings. (Bowers v. Bernards (1984)…

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.