Millard

Millard v. BIOSOURCES, INC.

Good Law
156 Cal. App. 4th 1338·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1861·68 Cal. Rptr. 3d 177
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 15, 2007D049737California5,281 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nares, J.

Richard Millard, a heating and air conditioning (HVAC) technician employed by an HVAC subcontractor, was injured when he was working in the attic of a commercial building that was being remodeled under the general supervision of the general contractor, Biosources, Inc. (Biosources). Millard alleges that the lights went out suddenly and he fell through the ceiling. Millard filed suit against Biosources.

The trial court granted summary judgment on Millard’s complaint, finding (1) Biosources as the general contractor and electrical contractor had no duty of care to Millard under either the Labor Code or under the doctrine of “retained control,” and (2) the decisions in Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689 [ 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 72 , 854 P.2d 721 ] (Privette) and Hooker v. Department of Transportation (2002) 27 Cal.4th 198 [ 115 Cal.Rptr.2d 853 , 38 P.3d 1081 ] (Hooker) barred his action.

On this appeal Millard asserts the court erred in granting summary judgment because (1) Privette did not bar his action as Biosources retained control of the electrical work; (2) Biosources owed a duty to him under Labor Code section 6304.5; (3) Biosources’s failure to exercise…

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.