| News News Archive  Email A Friend
April 15, 2024
Colorado Worker Shows Head Injury Happened as a Consequence of a Knock on the Head at Work April 4, 2024
Callfornia Division of Workers' Compensation Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee Meeting Scheduled for April 17, 2024 April 3, 2024
California Division of Workers' Compensation Posts Adjustments to Official Medical Fee Schedule (DMEPOS) April 2, 2024
California Division of Workers' Compensation Posts Adjustments to Official Medical Fee Schedule for Pathology and Clinical Laboratory
| | State Supreme Court Draws Line of Liability Around Public Entities
By Robert Warne - May 22, 2002For those handling municipal claims, you won’t have to worry about an influx of liability claims thanks to a California Supreme Court, May 20 ruling. The State’s high court had to decided which side of the proverbial line in the sand drawn by the Los Angeles Superior Court and the 2nd District Court of Appeal should municipal liability fall.
The timely decision in favor of protecting the liability of public entities comes at a time when courthouse violence has been on the increase.
Zelig v. County of Los Angeles, S081791, drew solid support on both sides. In behalf of Zelig were Consumer Attorneys of California and eight children’s and women’s rights groups, including the California Women’s Law Center and the Shelter Against Violent Environments.
The county was backed by California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, the Civil Justice Association of California, the California State Association of Counties and 115 cities and towns statewide.
Eileen Zelig was shot and killed by her ex-husband Harry Zelig in the hallway of the Los Angeles County Courthouse following divorce proceedings, Sept. 1, 1995.
Chief Justice Ronald George wrote, “The general rule is that although the government may assume responsibility for providing adequate police protection against third-party violence, this does not create a legal duty that normally will give rise to civil liability.”
He also said, “The court of appeals’ expansive view of governmental liability potentially could undermine the balanced scheme set out in the Tort Claims Act.”
Then he added, “The rule embraced by that court could impose liability for failure to protect persons from third-party crime at any public facility where passions run high—from a crowded office of the Department of Motor Vehicles to the offices of a child-protective services agency.”
Steven Renick, the attorney who argued the case for the county said, “The implications were very scary from the point of view from what potentially could be the scope of liability for municipalities,” according to the Associated Press. “If you basically say anything the government touches creates potential liability, they are going to be liable for everything.” |
__May11th2017.gif)
.gif)