Legal Opinion

Sandoval v. Qualcomm Inc.

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided October 19, 2018No. D070431PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBenke, J.

*272*385Plaintiff Jose M. Sandoval was severely burned by an "arc flash" from a live circuit breaker while working with contractor TransPower Testing, Inc., and its principal, Frank Sharghi (sometimes collectively, TransPower),1 at a cogeneration plant owned by defendant Qualcomm Incorporated (Qualcomm). The jury returned a special verdict finding that Qualcomm retained control over the safety conditions at the jobsite; that it negligently exercised such control; and that its negligence was a substantial factor in causing Sandoval's harm. The jury found Sandoval's employer, ROS Electrical Supply…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Soule v. General Motors Corp.California Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Neal v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Mercer v. PerezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Privette v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Kinsman v. Unocal Corp.California Supreme Court · 2005

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Strouse v. Webcor Constr., L.P., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  2. Sandoval v. Qualcomm IncorporatedCalifornia Supreme Court · 2021
  3. Siry Investment v. FarkhondehpourCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
  4. Siry Investment v. FarkhondehpourCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
  5. Strouse v. Webcor ConstructionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API