|
4056 Even when an attack on a patron of a business owner is not sufficiently foreseeable to result in a duty to provide security protection, there is a duty to act reasonably to protect the patron during an attack occurring in the owner's presence by taking minimally burdensome steps; ordinarily such a duty requires at least calling 9-1-1, but there may be circumstances under which a trier of fact could determine that an owner's failure to do so was not unreasonable.CitationMORRIS v DELA TORRE (Taco Shop Attack) 36 C4 260 [See: Ann M v Pacific Plaza 6 C4 666, T/AT 2/94; Sharon P v Arman 21 C4 1181, T/AT 1/00; KFC v Superior Court 14 C4 814, T/AT 2/97; Morris v Dela Torre (RevGrtd) 111 CA4 1047, T/AT 10/03; Delgado v Trax 36 C4 224, T/AT 8/05; Rowland v Christian 69 C2 108]
|
|
