CASE 3048 REVIEW DENIED A storekeeper owes customers a duty to keep the premises in reasonably safe condition, and an instruction to that effect was not error; under Proposition 51, a trial court was correct in reducing a husbands loss of consortium award by a fraction based on the fault apportioned to his injured wife.CitationCRADDOCK v KMART (Invitee) 89 CA4 1300 [See: BAJI 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.50, 8.00, 8.01, 8.02; Tuttle v Crawford 8 C2 126; Rowland v Christian 69 C2 108; Lantis v Condon 95 CA3 152; Hernandez v Badger 28 CA4 1791, T/AT 11/94]
|
|