Graciano v. K.A.M.C.O. Enterprises
Plaintiffs Juan Graciano (Graciano) and his wife Olga Graciano (Olga) appeal a judgment entered in favor of defendant K.A.M.C.O. Enterprises, Inc. (KAMCO) after a court trial. Plaintiffs sued KAMCO for personal injuries Graciano sustained when he fell off a second-story walkway in a new home being constructed by KAMCO.[1] The injury occurred while Graciano was performing painting work for his employer, Houston Ridge Painting (Houston), the contractor KAMCO hired to paint the interior of the house. Relying on Hooker v. Department of Transportation (2002) 27 Cal.4th 198 (Hooker), the court ruled that KAMCO was not liable for plaintiffs' injuries because although KAMCO retained minimal control over safety conditions on the premises, it did not retain control over safety conditions that affirmatively contributed to Graciano's injury. Plaintiffs contend (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the court's finding that KAMCO did not retain control over safety conditions that affirmatively contributed to Graciano's injury; and (2) because certain regulations in the California Code of Regulations impose a nondelegable duty on KAMCO, the court committed reversible error by not applying a negligence per se presumption under Evidence Code section 669. Court affirm.
Comments on Graciano v. K.A.M.C.O. Enterprises