Case Brief Soldano V. O’daniels Court of Appeals of California March 28, 1983 Statement of Facts a Patron of Happy Jack’s Saloon Went Across the Street to the Circle Inn to Talk with the Owner of the Two Establishments.
2016 Words9 Pages
Dustin SOLDANO, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Howard O'DANIELS, Defendant and Respondent. 141 Cal.App.3d 443, 190 Cal.Rptr. 310 Court of Appeal, Fifth District, California. (March 28, 1983) OPINION ANDREEN, Associate Justice. Does a business establishment incur liability for wrongful death if it denies use of its telephone to a good samaritan who explains an emergency situation occurring without and wishes to call the police? This appeal follows a judgment of dismissal of a complaint for wrongful death upon a motion for summary judgment...[by defendant]. "This action arises out of a shooting death occurring on August 9, 1977. Plaintiff's father [Darrell Soldano] was as shot and killed by one Rudolph Villanueva on that date at defendant's…show more content… For instance, California courts have found special relationships in Ellis v. D'Angelo (1953) 116 Cal.App.2d 310, 253 P.2d 675 (upholding a cause of action against parents who failed to warn a babysitter of the violent proclivities of their child), Johnson v. State of California (1968) 69 Cal.2d 782, 73 Cal.Rptr. 240, 447 P.2d 352 (upholding suit against the state for failure to warn foster parents of the dangerous tendencies of their ward), Morgan v. County of Yuba (1964) 230 Cal.App.2d 938, 41 Cal.Rptr. 508 (sustaining cause of action against a sheriff who had promised to warn decedent before releasing a dangerous prisoner, but failed to do so). (Tarasoff, supra, 17 Cal.3d at p. 436, fn. 9, 131 Cal.Rptr. 14, 551 P.2d 334.) And in Tarasoff, a therapist was told by his patient that he intended to kill Tatiana Tarasoff. The therapist and his supervisors predicted the patient presented a serious danger of violence. In fact he did, for he carried out his threat. The court held the patient-therapist relationship was enough to create a duty to exercise reasonable care to
protect others from the foreseeable result of the patient's illness. Here there was no special relationship between the defendant and the deceased. It would be stretching the concept beyond recognition to assert there was a relationship between the defendant and the patron from Happy Jack's
More about Case Brief Soldano V. O’daniels Court of Appeals of California March 28, 1983 Statement of Facts a Patron of Happy Jack’s Saloon Went Across the Street to the Circle Inn to Talk with the Owner of the Two Establishments.