Minch

Minch v. Department of California Highway Patrol

Good Law
140 Cal. App. 4th 895·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 924·2006 Daily Journal DAR 7976·44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 846·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5632
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 22, 2006C050338California5,474 words

Opinion

Opinion

Scotland, J.

While plaintiff Troy Minch, a tow truck operator, was working at the scene of a traffic accident, a passing motorist lost control of his vehicle and hit plaintiff. Severely harmed, plaintiff brought a personal injury action against the California Highway Patrol (CHP), alleging that CHP officers at the scene were negligent in “failing to properly monitor and/or regulate traffic within the vicinity of the [accident scene].” Finding the officers had no duty of care as to plaintiff, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the CHP. Plaintiff appeals.

We agree with the trial court. As we will explain, undisputed evidence demonstrates the CHP officers did not have a duty of care toward plaintiff because they did not create or increase the risk of harm that led to plaintiff’s injuries, and the circumstances did not establish a special relationship between the officers and plaintiff such that the officers would have had a duty to protect him. We also reject his claim that the provisions of the CHP Officer Safety Manual establish the officers owed plaintiff a duty in tort. Although the manual would be admissible evidence on the question of breach of duty, if a duty 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.