Cheyney v. City of Los Angeles

McCOMB, J.

From an order granting defendant’s motion for a nonsuit in an action to recover damages for personal injuries', plaintiff appeals.

' Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff (appellant), the essential facts are these:

On September 3, 1950, plaintiff in company with her husband and several other persons went for an automobile ride. At about 11:30 p.m. they stopped in a parking lot at a beach which was under the supervision of defendant city. At the time there was no one on the beach, it was dark and there were no lights or fires.

Near the place where they stopped was a stairway leading from the parking lot to the sand. The stairway had 23 steps with a handrail extending to the last few steps. The last step was 29 inches from the sand according to measurements made September 5, 1950.

Plaintiff, after standing a few minutes in the parking lot decided to go onto the sand. She walked down the stairway in a normal fashion holding onto the handrail until she Reached the last few steps. She then moved to the center of the stairway and proceeded more slowly, taking one step at á time. During all this time she had looked at the steps ahead of her though they appeared dim and shadowy, darker at the bottom than at the top. There was no artificial light shining upon them. At the last step plaintiff could see “just darkness.” She took another step, fell into the sand and was injured.

Plaintiff was aware that the action of the waves and tides were at this time eroding the beaches along the coast of Southern California.

The supervisor of this beach area had an office some 700 to 800 .feet north of this, stairway and could see the stairway from his office. - It was his duty to watch all portions of .the beach to protect the safety of recreation seekers and to inspect

[77]

and keep in repair this stairway. He had no knowledge that the sand level was at any time below the level of the bottom step of the stairway. The waves and tides had varied the sand level as much as 5 feet from time to time" and such change could take place within 24 hours.

■ The trial court granted defendant’s motion for a nonsuit on two grounds: (1) that as a matter of law plaintiff had not proved facts sufficient for the jury to find defendant had notice or knowledge of an alleged dangerous or defective condition and (2) that as a matter of law plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence.