Nixon-Egli Equipment v. Superior Court CA4/2
Opinion
Opinion
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The underlying lawsuit is a personal injury action brought by Rui Costa against
petitioners. Costa was at work on a highway construction site when the heavy equipment
vehicle he was assisting ran over him, severing both legs, one at the hip and the other just
below the hip. Petitioners are the owners/manufacturers/sellers of the vehicle, described
as a “pavement grinder” or “road-milling machine.”
1 Costa’s wife is also a plaintiff, suing for loss of consortium. For convenience, we will generally refer to Costa as plaintiff in the singular.
All subsequent statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.
2 In its motion, Coast presented three grounds on which the motion should be
granted. First, that as the contractor that hired Costa’s employer to perform work on the
project, it was immune from liability under Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th
689 (Privette) and therefore even a modest payment must be deemed to have been in
good faith. Second, that because the statute of limitations had run and plaintiff had not
sued Coast, as a matter of law Coast could not be liable for any damages. Third, that as a
matter of fact Coast bore…