Joann Johnson vs. PG&E Gas Company, et al.

All doubts regarding the existence of material issues of fact are resolved in favor of the party opposing summary judgment. (Sosinsky v. Grant (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1548, 1556, modified (June 15, 1992).)

In moving for summary judgment, Defendant assert three grounds to support summary judgment. (1) The County did not own, maintain, or control the subject intersection; (2) The evidence shows no dangerous condition existed at the time of the incident; and (3) Plaintiffs cannot establish the County created the alleged condition or had actual or constructive notice of the condition.

The court finds that there is a triable issue of material fact as to all three of Defendant’s grounds for summary judgment.

As to the issue of control, Plaintiff has provided admissible evidence that creates a triable issue of material fact as to the County’s control over the intersection in so far as visibility of the intersection and the traffic control signs; see Plaintiff’s response to Defendant’s UMF 11 and supporting evidence cited thereto; see also Plaintiff’s AMFs 2-3, 6-7 and evidence cited thereto.

Turning to the issue of dangerous condition, Plaintiffs AMFs 29, 32 and evidence cited thereto create a dispute as to whether a dangerous condition existed at the time of the incident.

Last, Plaintiff has controverted the issue of notice as there is a dispute as to Defendant’s UMFs 43-44; see Plaintiff’s response to Defendant’s UFMs 43-44 and evidence cited thereto regarding these facts. In addition. Plaintiff’s AMFs 23-24, 28 also create a dispute as to actual or constructive notice; see evidence cited in Plaintiff’s Separate Statement at 23-24 and 28 regarding these facts.

As there is a dispute as to control, the alleged dangerous condition, and notice, there are triable issues of material fact. Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment must be denied.

25CV-05078 Joann Johnson vs. PG&E Gas Company, et al.

Motion for Leave to File 1st Amended Complaint

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for leave to file a first amended complaint is GRANTED.

Plaintiff is to file their proposed first amended complaint within ten (10) days of this court’s order.