Robert Andrews (“Andrews”), an employee of an independent home inspection company, was injured when he slipped and fell while performing his work duties. He and his wife, Paula Andrews (collectively “appellants”) sued the homeowner, Kathleen Wagner (“Wagner”), now deceased, asserting causes of action for negligence, premises liability, and a derivative claim for loss of consortium. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Wagner on the basis of the Privette doctrine, which holds that an employee of an independent contractor generally may not recover tort damages for work-related injuries from the contractor’s hirer. (Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689, 702 (Privette).)
Appellants contend the trial court’s order granting summary judgment was erroneous because (1) Wagner failed to meet her burden to establish that she was a “hirer” within the meaning of the Privette doctrine, and (2) there are triable issues of fact regarding the application of the “concealed hazard” exception found in Kinsman v. Unocal Corporation (2005) 37 Cal.4th 659 (Kinsman). We affirm.
There are 0 comments