Mathews

Mathews v. City of Cerritos

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 77·2 Cal. App. 4th 1380·4 Cal. Rptr. 2d 16·92 Daily Journal DAR 1314·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 813
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 1992B055450California1,553 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ashby, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Ryan Mathews, by his guardian ad litem, sued defendant and respondent City of Cerritos for personal injuries suffered in a bicycle riding accident in a park owned and operated by the city. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of respondent (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (c)) on the grounds (1) as a matter of law the condition of the park was not a dangerous condition of public property (Gov. Code, §§ 830, 830.2, 835) and (2) respondent had design immunity (Gov. Code, § 830.6).

We affirm on the first ground and do not reach the second.

Summary judgment is appropriate if the defendant conclusively negates a necessary element of the plaintiff’s case and demonstrates that under no hypothesis is there a material issue of fact that requires the process of a trial. (Molko v. Holy Spirit Assn. (1988) 46 Cal.3d 1092, 1107 [ 252 Cal.Rptr. 122 , 762 P.2d 46 ].) Whether property is in a dangerous condition often presents a question of fact, but summary judgment is appropriate if the trial or appellate court, viewing the evidence most favorably to the plaintiff, determines that no reasonable person would conclude the condition created a…

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.