Harding

Harding v. City of Hawthorne

Good Law
114 Cal. App. 580·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 834·300 P. 42
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 4, 1931Docket No. 6562.California959 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bishop, J.

In this action plaintiffs seek to recover damages from the City of Hawthorne because of the negligent operation of a motorcycle by a police officer of the city while acting within the course and scope of his employment. It his opening statement before the jury plaintiff spoke of the operator of the motorcycle as a “motorcycle policeman”. A motion for "judgment on the pleadings was thereupon interposed and after some discussion plaintiff requested and was granted leave to amend his complaint by substituting the characterization “police officer” for the word “employee” as applied to the driver of the offending motorcycle in the complaint as drawn. The motion for judgment on the pleadings was renewed by the defendant city as to itself alone, and granted, judgment following. The question thus submitted to the trial court, and now to us, is whether or not a municipality is liable for injuries occasioned by the careless and negligent operation of a motorcycle by a police officer on duty. It is our opinion that the negative answer given by the trial court is the correct one.

“It is thoroughly settled in this state that in the absence of a statute imposing the liability, a municipality…

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.