Vogt

Vogt v. Herron Construction, Inc.

Good Law
132 Cal. Rptr. 3d 683·200 Cal. App. 4th 643·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1366
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 17, 2011No. E052434California3,668 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Richli, J.

Plaintiff Augustus Vogt worked for the concrete subcontractor on a large construction project. Herron Construction, Inc. (Herron), was the framing contractor. An employee of Herron had parked his personal pickup truck close to where Vogt’s employer was about to start pouring cement. Vogt therefore asked Herron’s employee to move his truck. The employee complied, but in the process, he ran over Vogt.

*647 Vogt sued Herron for personal injury on a respondeat superior theory. The trial court granted summary judgment for Herron, on the ground that Herron’s employee had not been acting in the course and scope of his employment.

We must reverse. There was evidence that, by moving his truck, Herron’s employee furthered the overall construction of the project; the resulting risk of injury was inherent to the enterprise. Moreover, even assuming that he had the subjective purpose of preventing damage to his own truck, moving the truck was necessary to his comfort, convenience, and welfare while on the job and thus still within the scope of his employment.

I

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Herron was the framing subcontractor on a construction project in Riverside. Jesus Cruz was an…

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.