Krsto Mijanovic, Jeffrey C. Schmid and John M. Wilkerson | Haight Brown & Bonesteel In Gonzalez v. Mathis (2021 WL 3671594) (“Gonzalez”), the Supreme Court of California held that a landowner generally owes no duty to an independent contractor or its workers to remedy or adopt other measures to protect them against known hazards on the premises.… Continue reading Under Privette Doctrine, A Landowner Delegates All Responsibility For Workplace Safety to its Independent Contractor, and therefore Owes No Duty to Remedy or Adopt Measures to Protect Against Known Hazards
Tag: Privette Doctrine
California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”
Tracy D. Forbath | Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith In Gonzalez v. Mathis (Aug. 19, 2021, S247677) __ Cal.5th___, the California Supreme Court reversed an appellate decision holding that a landowner may be liable to an independent contractor, or the contractor’s workers, for injuries resulting from “known hazards,” as running contrary to the Privette doctrine. In Gonzalez, the contractor, who… Continue reading California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”
Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine
Garret Murai | California Construction Law Blog | April 17, 2019 It’s one of the most quoted phrases in legal history: “Shouting fire in a [crowded] theater.” It comes from the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 1919 decision in Schenck v. U.S. and has come to stand for the proposition that not all speech, in particular dangerous speech, is… Continue reading Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine
In a Win for Property Owners California Court Expands and Clarifies Privette Doctrine
Garret Murai | California Construction Law Blog | March 21, 2018 We’ve written before about the Privette doctrine, which generally holds that a higher-tiered party is not liable for injuries sustained by employees of a lower-tiered party under the peculiar risk doctrine, here, here, here and here. We’ve also talked about some of the exceptions to the Privette doctrine, including the non-delegable duty doctrine and the negligent… Continue reading In a Win for Property Owners California Court Expands and Clarifies Privette Doctrine
Construction Injuries Under the Privette Doctrine. An Electrifying, but Perhaps Not Particularly Shocking, Story . . .
Garret Murai | California Construction Law Blog | January 3, 2017 We’ve talked about the Privette doctrine before (see here, here, and here). The Privette doctrine, named after the court case Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689, provides in general that project owners and contractors are not responsible for worksite injuries suffered by employees of lower-tiered contractors they have… Continue reading Construction Injuries Under the Privette Doctrine. An Electrifying, but Perhaps Not Particularly Shocking, Story . . .