Kephart

Kephart v. Genuity, Inc.

Good Law
136 Cal. App. 4th 280·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 128·2006 Daily Journal DAR 1385·38 Cal. Rptr. 3d 845·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 987
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 2006C047659California6,353 words

Opinion

Opinion

Scotland, J.

Plaintiffs Lily Kephart, Huan Kephart, and their children, Jaymar Kephart, Huan Kephart II, and Dylan Kephart, suffered harm when their Toyota 4Runner rolled over after being forced from the road by another driver, Duncan Graham. They sued Graham for damages. They also sued his employer, Genuity, Inc. (Genuity), on the theory that Graham caused the accident while acting in the course and scope of his employment and, therefore, Genuity was vicariously liable for the harm caused by its employee, Graham. In addition, plaintiffs sued Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., and Toyota of Santa Cruz, alleging that design defects in the Toyota 4Runner (the Toyota) contributed to the harm suffered by plaintiffs.

Graham settled his civil liability with plaintiffs and was dismissed from the action. The case was then tried before a jury, which returned verdicts in favor of Genuity and the Toyota defendants.

Plaintiffs appeal only from the judgment entered in favor of Genuity. Among other things, they contend the trial court erred in denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which was based on their claim that, as a matter of law,…

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.