Legal Opinion

Pedeferri v. Seidner Enterprises

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 15, 2013No. B233542PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HOFFSTADT, J. *

Does a commercial vendor owe a duty of care to persons on or near the roadway who are injured as a result of the vendor’s negligence in loading and securing cargo in a vehicle in a way that distracts the vehicle’s driver? Applying the controlling principles of California law, we conclude that such a duty exists and that a categorical “no duty” exception for vendors should not be created. We also hold that the driver’s negligence in driving under the influence of marijuana does not constitute a superseding cause as a matter of law; instead, the issue of superseding cause…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
  3. Rowland v. ChristianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  5. People v. GardeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Grotheer v. Escape Adventures, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  2. Hernandez v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  3. QDOS, Inc. v. Signature Fin., LLC, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  4. Jing Huang v. Bicycle Casino, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2016
  5. Kelly v. J.A.W. Land & Trading LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2013

10 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