Sandoval

Sandoval v. Qualcomm Incorporated

Good Law
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 9, 2021S252796California8,689 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cuéllar, J.

Opinion of the Court by Cuéllar, J.

An electrical parts specialist sustained third degree burns to over one third of the surface area of his body after he triggered an arc flash from a circuit he did not realize was “live” with flowing electricity. The contractor for whom he’d been working had removed the protective cover on that live circuit while work was underway. A jury concluded that the contractor acted negligently and was liable for the injuries. What this case is about is whether further liability arises for the company that hired the contractor, owned the premises, and operated the electrical equipment. The answer here is no. Strong public policy considerations readily acknowledged in our past decisions generally support a straightforward presumption about the responsibilities of hirers and contractors for worker injuries in situations like this: A person or entity hiring an independent contractor (a “hirer”) ordinarily delegates to that independent contractor all responsibility for the safety of the contractor’s workers. (SeaBright Ins. Co. v. US Airways, Inc. (2011) 52 Cal.4th 590, 597, 600, 602 (SeaBright).) This presumption is rooted in hirers’ reasons for employing…

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.