Scott

Scott v. City of Santa Monica CA2/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 2015B256651California2,692 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lui, J.

BACKGROUND

Scott filed a government tort claim, followed by the complaint commencing this action against the City for damages for negligence. In both, he alleged he suffered severe injury to his leg on October 6, 2011, about 6:00 p.m. when he tripped over a metal object and fell while walking on the “Palisades Park walking path near Georgina Avenue” in Santa Monica. Scott’s complaint asserted two theories: general negligence and premises liability. The City’s answer asserted, inter alia, immunity under section 831.4. The City filed a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication asserting immunity from Scott’s common law claim of general negligence, pursuant to section 815, and both “design immunity” and “trail immunity” from his premises liability claim pursuant to sections 830.6 and 831.4, respectively. Scott’s opposition conceded the City’s position with respect to his general negligence cause of action, but opposed the assertions of immunity. Because the trial court ultimately granted the motion with respect to trail immunity only, we do not address any evidence or arguments pertaining solely to design immunity. The undisputed facts and evidence submitted in support 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.