Doe

Doe v. Brightstar Residential Incorporated

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 10, 2022B304084California4,553 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiley, J.

Filed 3/10/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

JANE IL DOE, B304084

Plaintiff and Appellant, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC667499 v.

BRIGHTSTAR RESIDENTIAL

INCORPORATED et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Deirdre H. Hill, Judge. Reversed and remanded. Manly, Stewart & Finaldi, Morgan A. Stewart, Saul E. Wolf, Cristina J. Nolan; Esner, Chang & Boyer, Holly N. Boyer, Shea S. Murphy and Kevin K. Nguyen for Plaintiff and Appellant. Berman, Berman, Berman, Scheider & Lowary, Mark E. Lowary, Brian T. Gravdal and David H. Ryan for Defendants and Respondents.

____________________ In her 20s, Jane IL Doe had the mental age of a child. A handyman sexually assaulted her at a residence for the disabled. Doe sued the residence and its owners for failing to protect her. The trial court granted summary judgment because the attack was unforeseeable. Doe’s appeal raises two central issues. The first concerns evidence law, which can be intricate. Police reports are a prime example. Often these…

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.