Murillo

Murillo v. Diego CA2/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 14, 2022B312272California3,148 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Accident On February 2, 2019, Victor and his wife hosted a party at their Palmdale home to celebrate their daughter’s 12th birthday. Victor’s daughter asked to have a mechanical bull at the party. The bull, which Victor rented from a local business, P&M Party Rental, was delivered to Victor’s home on the day of the party. The device did not have a saddle, only a single rope grip positioned near the bull’s neck. The bull was set up by employees of another company and it was enclosed in an accompanying bounce house. Victor did not make or observe any changes being made to the bull after it was readied for use. Among the party’s invitees was Cruz. Although he had helped his sister and Victor purchase their home, Cruz did not live there or manage the property. In addition, he played no role in organizing or hosting the party and, like Victor, did not make changes to the bull (or see changes being made) after it had been set up.

2 Also among the party goers was plaintiff, an adult. Plaintiff knew before attending that a mechanical bull would be at the party and, indeed, that was the “main reason” she decided to attend a child’s birthday party. Previously,…

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.