Lobo

INTRODUCTION

In Lobo v. Tamco (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 297 (Lobo I), we reversed a summary

judgment in favor of the defendant, Tamco, and remanded the matter for further

proceedings in the trial court. Trial was held solely on the issue of Tamco’s vicarious

liability for the negligence of its employee, Luis Del Rosario. The jury found in favor of

Tamco. Plaintiffs,1 the survivors of a deputy sheriff killed in a vehicular collision with

Del Rosario’s car as he left Tamco’s premises (see Lobo I, at p. 299), contend that based

on the legal principles we enunciated in Lobo I, the evidence adduced at trial compels a

finding that Del Rosario was acting within the scope of his employment when the

accident occurred. They also argue that the trial court erred in refusing a requested jury

instruction.

1 In general, we will refer to all four plaintiffs jointly as “plaintiffs.” Where it is necessary to distinguish between them, we will refer to them by name.

2 We conclude that substantial evidence supports the verdict and that the court

properly rejected the requested instruction. Accordingly, we will affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

Daniel Lobo, a San Bernardino County deputy…