Annocki v. Peterson Enterprises
180 Cal.Rptr.3d 474
Cal. Ct. App.2014Background
- Defendant Geoffrey’s restaurant is in Malibu and opens a parking lot with limited staff and no signage directing exits.
- On March 16, 2011, decedent Joseph M. Annocki, riding a motorcycle on Pacific Coast Highway, collided with a vehicle exiting Geoffrey’s parking lot.
- The highway is a high-speed, multi-lane road with temporary center dividers called Qwik Kurb paddles and a 45–55 mph limit.
- Plaintiffs allege the parking lot design and staffing created danger by impairing visibility and leaving drivers to navigate exits without adequate warning.
- The TAC asserted wrongful death and dangerous condition of public property theories; defendant demurred, arguing no duty to warn offsite conditions.
- Trial court sustained the demurrer, ruling Pacific Coast Highway was inherently dangerous and Geoffrey’s had no duty to warn about it; plaintiffs appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether landowner duty extends offsite for parking lot exit hazards | Annockis argue duty to warn offsite risks exists. | Peterson Enterprises contends no duty to warn offsite conditions on the highway. | Duty to warn patrons about exit danger established; amendment allowed. |
| Whether Rowland factors support a duty to warn in this configuration | Barnes-style foreseeability and offsite risk show duty. | Traffic on the highway cannot be controlled by owner; signs unnecessary. | Rowland factors support a duty to warn; factual questions remain for amendment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Barnes v. Black, 71 Cal.App.4th 1473 (1999) (duty may extend offsite where property configuration creates offsite risk)
- Rowland v. Christian, 69 Cal.2d 108 (1968) (balance factors for duty including foreseeability and policy)
- McGarvey v. Pacific Gas & Elec. Co., 18 Cal.App.3d 555 (1971) (courts may find foreseeability of injury from condition created by defendant)
- Paz v. State of California, 22 Cal.4th 550 (2000) (premises liability requires showing duty and causal connection)
- Alcaraz v. Vece, 14 Cal.4th 1149 (1997) (landowners owe ordinary care to avoid unreasonable risks)
- Seaber v. Hotel Del Coronado, 1 Cal.App.4th 481 (1991) (no duty to warn about dangers on adjacent streets absent owner-created risk)