24 Cited authorities

Blank v. Kirwan
39 Cal.3d 311 (Cal. 1985) Cited 3,093 times
Holding that the standard for a failure to state a claim is whether "the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"
Reid v. Google, Inc.
50 Cal.4th 512 (Cal. 2010) Cited 1,123 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that “the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely, if ever, can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowner's premises”
Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center
6 Cal.4th 666 (Cal. 1993) Cited 575 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that to impose duty without requisite degree of foreseeability would force landlords to become insurers of public safety
Frances T. v. Village Green Owners Assn
42 Cal.3d 490 (Cal. 1986) Cited 292 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that directors of a corporation "are liable to third persons injured by their own tortious conduct. . . ."
Phillips v. TLC Plumbing, Inc.
172 Cal.App.4th 1133 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 133 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding that the “great weight of case authority” does not recognize negligent hiring claims for harm inflicted by former employee
Isaacs v. Huntington Memorial Hospital
38 Cal.3d 112 (Cal. 1985) Cited 249 times 1 Legal Analyses
Reversing judgment of nonsuit in action alleging invitees of hospital shot in hospital parking lot as a result of lack of security and inoperable lighting there
Juarez v. Boy Scouts of America, Inc.
81 Cal.App.4th 377 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000) Cited 162 times
Finding duty under Rowland , but concluding in the alternative that the plaintiff satisfied the special relationship test
Lopez v. Southern California Rapid Transit Dist.
40 Cal.3d 780 (Cal. 1985) Cited 243 times
Holding that because entitlement to the immunity requires a showing that the employee consciously exercised discretion by balancing potential risks and advantages, "[s]uch a showing was not and could not have been made by [the defendant] at the demurrer stage"
Paz v. State
22 Cal.4th 550 (Cal. 2000) Cited 140 times
Holding that the negligent undertaking theory of liability was implicated where plaintiff alleged that defendant breached its contractual obligation to a third party
Kentucky Fried Chicken of Cal. v. Superior Court
14 Cal.4th 814 (Cal. 1997) Cited 88 times
In Kentucky Fried Chicken of Cal., Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 14 Cal.4th 814, the California Supreme Court held "only that there is no duty to comply with a robber's unlawful demand for the surrender of property."

Reply To Opposition

24 Cited authorities

Holding that the standard for a failure to state a claim is whether "the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"

Holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that “the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely, if ever, can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowner's premises”

Holding that to impose duty without requisite degree of foreseeability would force landlords to become insurers of public safety

Holding that directors of a corporation "are liable to third persons injured by their own tortious conduct. . . ."

Finding that the “great weight of case authority” does not recognize negligent hiring claims for harm inflicted by former employee

Reversing judgment of nonsuit in action alleging invitees of hospital shot in hospital parking lot as a result of lack of security and inoperable lighting there

Finding duty under Rowland , but concluding in the alternative that the plaintiff satisfied the special relationship test

Holding that because entitlement to the immunity requires a showing that the employee consciously exercised discretion by balancing potential risks and advantages, "[s]uch a showing was not and could not have been made by [the defendant] at the demurrer stage"

Holding that the negligent undertaking theory of liability was implicated where plaintiff alleged that defendant breached its contractual obligation to a third party

In Kentucky Fried Chicken of Cal., Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 14 Cal.4th 814, the California Supreme Court held "only that there is no duty to comply with a robber's unlawful demand for the surrender of property."