|
4578 A general contractor who did not retain control of a project and who did not affirmatively contribute to an injury sustained by the employee of a subcontractor is not liable (i.e., has no duty) to the employee; although violation of a CAL-OSHA rule or regulation may be used by a plaintiff who is not employed by the violator to establish breach of a duty, it does not establish the existence of a duty; negligence per se does not apply unless a duty exists.CitationMILLARD v BIOSOURCES (Attic Light) 156 CA4 1338 [See: LabC 6304.5; Privette v SuperCt 5 C4 689, T/AT 9/93; Hooker v Dep't of Trans 27 C4 198, T/AT 3/02; Elsner v Uveges 34 C4 915, T/AT 1/05]
|
|
