Haver

Haver v. BNSF Railway

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 23, 2014B246527MCalifornia3,280 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 6/23/14 (unmodified opinion attached)

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

JOSHUA HAVER et al., B246527

Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC435551) v.

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION

BNSF RAILWAY CO., [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

Defendant and Respondent.

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on June 3, 2014, and certified for publication, be modified in the following particulars: On page 5, the heading “Defendant’s Challenges to Campbell” should be replaced with “Plaintiffs’ Challenges to Campbell.” On page 5, in the above referenced heading, the first sentence reads: “Defendant initially made two contentions to support his position that the trial court erred in sustaining the demurrer in reliance on Campbell—Campbell is factually distinguishable, but if not, it was incorrectly decided.” The sentence should be replaced with “Plaintiffs initially made two contentions to support their position that the trial court erred in sustaining the demurrer in reliance on…

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.