Plaintiff was severely injured from a fall from the edge of a cliff above the Sacramento River in Redding. Although he cannot recall how or why he fell, he sued his two companions, asserting causes of action for assault and battery, negligence, willful misconduct, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. He claims that defendants put him in peril by bringing him to the edge of a cliff when he was highly intoxicated, leading to his fall, and that they aggravated his injuries by waiting several hours to inform the authorities of the fall. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of a defendant named Sarah. The appellate court reversed in part, stating that plaintiff “established triable issues of material fact as to the negligence and willful misconduct causes of action, that on the facts tendered a jury reasonably could infer that Sarah had acted to put an inebriated [plaintiff] in peril at the edge of a cliff. We shall reverse the summary judgment entered in favor of Sarah but affirm the summary adjudication of the assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress causes of action.” (Carlsen v. Koivumaki (Cal. App. Third Dist.; July 7, 2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 879, [174 Cal.Rptr.3d 339].)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.