Adkins

Adkins v. State of California

Caution
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 1117·50 Cal. App. 4th 1802·59 Cal. Rptr. 2d 59·96 Daily Journal DAR 14215·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8596
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 26, 1996B085106California7,810 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aldrich, J.

This case comes to us after the trial court granted a nonsuit in favor of defendant and respondent State of California (the State) at the conclusion of plaintiffs’ opening statement. The court entered judgment finding the State was immune from liability under the Emergency Services Act. The primary issue we address is whether the State is immune from liability under the Emergency Services Act for intentionally lying to persons about the health and safety of chemicals they handled during a state emergency to eradicate an infestation of pests. We conclude in such situations the State is not immune from intentional concealment of known dangers which cause personal injuries. We therefore reverse the judgment.

Introduction

This case arises out of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly) eradication program of 1989. Plaintiffs and appellants (plaintiffs) were hired by the State to hang Medfly traps by the State. Plaintiffs became ill after handling the chemical used in the traps. Plaintiffs’ supervisors knowingly lied to plaintiffs about the effect of the chemical, told plaintiffs the chemical was completely safe and refused to allow plaintiffs to wear protective clothing. As 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.