Laabs v. Southern California Edison Co., No. E044917

In a negligence action, trial court judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part where the evidence did not establish that defendant did not have a duty to plaintiff a as a matter of law, and triable issues of fact remained as to defendant's duty as a public utility and its exercise of control in determining the placement of the light poles.   

Read Laabs v. Southern California Edison Co., No. E044917 in PDF

Read Laabs v. Southern California Edison Co., No. E044917 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Kurt J. Lewin (retired judge of the L.A. Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) and Tom Garza, Judges. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO
Filed July 20, 2009

Judges
Before King, J., Miller, J., Hollenhorst, J.
Opinion by King, J.
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by Hollenhorst, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Lascher & Lascher, Wendy Lascher, Aris Karakalos; Richard Harris Law Firm and Richard Harris
For Respondent: Brian A. Cardoza.