Chu v. ABS Development Enterprises
Plaintiff and appellant Thuy Chu, on behalf of herself and as guardian ad litem for her minor son, appeals from a judgment following a jury trial in favor of defendants and respondents ABC Development Enterprises, DSC Laser and Skin Care Center, Inc., and Mt. Hawley Insurance Company, in this action arising out of the death of her husband Phi Nong. Chu contends: 1) the trial court erred by granting summary adjudication of a premises liability cause of action in favor of ABC and DSC; 2) the trial court erred in permitting Mt. Hawley Insurance Company to appear for Pinewave; 3) the trial court should have granted a motion for judgment on the pleadings on Mt. Hawley’s complaint-in-intervention; 4) the trial court erred by admitting the declaration of Mark Sanders; 5) the trial court erred by excluding evidence of Cal-OSHA regulations (see Lab. Code, § 6300 et seq. [Cal. Occupational Safety & Health Act of 1973 (Cal–OSHA)]), economic damages, and settlement payees; 6) the trial court erred by denying her requested instructions on direct liability in special risk cases, nondelegable duty, and negligence per se; and 7) there is no substantial evidence to support the findings that Pinewave, ABC, and DSC were not negligent.
We conclude the record is inadequate to review Chu’s contention concerning the summary adjudication ruling without a reporter’s transcript of the hearing. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting Mt. Hawley to intervene and appear in the name of its insured at trial. We find no prejudicial evidentiary or instructional errors, and there is substantial evidence to support the judgment. Therefore, we affirm.
Comments on Chu v. ABS Development Enterprises