Pham

Pham v. Southern California Edison CA2/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 2, 2023B316026California4,368 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

I. The Accident

On the night of January 23, 2019, Pham and Tran went for a walk to a neighborhood park located in the County of Riverside. At around 8:30 p.m., the pair entered a crosswalk on Morgan Hill Drive, a major street running alongside the park. Within seconds, they were struck by a car attempting to make a left turn through the intersection. The driver claimed that she could not see the couple until she hit them.

II. The Lawsuit

A. The Complaint On May 18, 2020, appellants sued, inter alia, SCE for negligence. They argued that SCE installed and operated the streetlights in the neighborhood where the accident occurred, and claimed that SCE “purposely decrease[d] the amount of street

1 Appellants each sued through a guardian ad litem.

2 lighting and illumination” in the area “solely for [the] purpose of mitigating light pollution for [a] nearby . . . [o]bservatory,” regardless of its “adverse affects on visibility of users of public roadways.” Specifically, appellants alleged that the fateful crosswalk was located “within a densely populated suburban residential community,” and that SCE had caused the crosswalk to be…

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.