Roe

Roe v. McDonald's Corp.

Bad Law
129 Cal. App. 4th 1107·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 871·2005 Daily Journal DAR 6211·29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 127·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4520
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 27, 2005G032638, G032661California4,550 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bedsworth, J.

Jane Roe sued McDonald’s Corporation, South Coast Plaza, Man-Cal, Inc., and Lincoln Security Services, Inc., after she was allegedly sexually assaulted in the restroom of the McDonald’s restaurant located in South Coast Plaza. Shortly before the assault, Roe had seen her alleged assailant just outside the restaurant, staring at her and making sexually suggestive facial expressions. However, the man was gone by the time she reported his conduct to both a security guard standing behind her in line and to the McDonald’s cashier who took her order. Roe alleged defendants were negligent in the design of the restaurant, which placed the restroom in a remote location readily accessible to the outside, and because they failed to take steps to apprehend the man (and otherwise protect her against the assault) after she had reported his strange behavior.

The trial court granted summary judgments in favor of all defendants, concluding Roe had failed to raise a triable issue of fact concerning either her assertion defendants had acted negligently, or her assertion that their alleged negligence had been a cause of her assault. We conclude the trial court was correct.

In support of…

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.