Legal Opinion

Heiner v. Kmart Corp.

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 25, 2000No. A082437PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SEPULVEDA, J.

Kmart Corporation (Kmart) timely appeals from a final judgment, entered after a jury trial, by which Kmart was held liable for negligence, battery, and negligent infliction of emotional distress, and ordered to pay compensatory damages totaling $3.8 million to respondent George Heiner, a dentist who was injured in an altercation with a Kmart security guard. Kmart contends that the trial court erred by (1) excluding evidence that Heiner was operating his dental practice in violation of certain provisions of the Business and Professions Code and was, thus, not entitled to…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1975
  2. American Motorcycle Assn. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Daly v. General Motors Corp.California Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Agarwal v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. White v. Ultramar, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1999

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Shaw v. County of Santa CruzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  2. Children's Hospital & Medical Center v. BontaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  3. People v. MillardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. Pannu v. Land Rover North America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  5. Feitelberg v. Credit Suisse First Boston, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API