Rosemary Verdugo v. Target Corporation

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 28, 201410-57008California2,290 words

Opinion

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL VERDUGO, brother of No. 10-57008 Decedent; ROSEMARY VERDUGO, mother, successor and heir of Mary D.C. No. Ann Verdugo, Decedent, 2:10-cv-06930- Plaintiffs-Appellants, ODW-AJW

v.

OPINION

TARGET CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation, Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Otis D. Wright II, District Judge, Presiding

Argued May 7, 2012 Submitted October 28, 2014 Pasadena, California

Filed October 28, 2014

Before: Harry Pregerson, Susan P. Graber, and Marsha S. Berzon, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam Opinion; Separate Opinion by Judge Pregerson SUMMARY*

California Law

After the California Supreme Court answered a question that was certified by the panel, the panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of a case, and held that Target Corporation, a commercial property owner, had no common law duty to provide an Automatic External Defibrillator in its stores for use in a medical emergency.

Judge Pregerson wrote separately to express his hope that Target will…

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.