James Hall v. Regal Entertainment Group , 705 F. App'x 664 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    DEC 11 2017
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    JAMES E. HALL,                                   No.   16-17122
    Plaintiff-Appellant,               D.C. No. 1:15-cv-01005-EPG
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    REGAL ENTERTAINMENT GROUP,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of California
    Erica P. Grosjean, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
    Submitted December 7, 2017**
    San Francisco, California
    Before:      SCHROEDER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges, and ELLIS,***
    District Judge.
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    ***
    The Honorable Sara Lee Ellis, United States District Judge for the
    Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation.
    page 2
    “Where [a] dangerous condition is brought about by . . . third persons . . . or
    by other causes which are not due to the negligence of the owner, or his
    employees, then to impose liability the owner must have either actual or
    constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition[.]” Hatfield v. Levy Bros., 
    117 P.2d 841
    , 845 (Cal. 1941).
    Hall alleges that Regal had constructive knowledge of the spill because: (1)
    Regal’s ushers aren’t provided “carpet cleaner, cleaning solutions, or scrapers” to
    clean spills; (2) no one addressed the spill for at least 30 minutes after Hall
    reported it; and (3) Hall’s expert inspected the theater three years later and
    observed “[s]lippery and sticky spots” on the carpet. These allegations may
    indicate that Regal didn’t properly clean up spills after Hall slipped, but they have
    no bearing on Regal’s constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition
    beforehand. “In the absence of actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous
    condition, the owner is not liable.” Moore v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 
    3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 813
    , 816 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003).
    AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-17122

Citation Numbers: 705 F. App'x 664

Filed Date: 12/11/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023