SU0007300 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zimbra http://brut:180/zimbra/h/prirmnessage?id=96823 In a similar case,Aaltui V. Grande Properbes(1994)29 Cal.AppAth 1369,Willhite noted this district's Div.One held that a city's power to inspect and regulate private swimming pools did not subject it to liability for a death by drowning in a privately owned pool at an apartment complex. Willhite explained: 'Reading OWfnan and Aaitui together, we conclude that the PUC's regulatory authority over the crossing does not establish control of that property within the meaning of section 830.To begin,the PUC does not own the property and holds no interest in it.It is Union Pacific's responsibility to maintain the Flashing signals at the crossing.Further,pursuant to the PUC's General Order 72-13,Union Pacific has the responsibility to maintain the crossing and an area two feet outside the tracks and the City of Carson has the responsibility`to maintain the approaches and those portions of the crossing not included under[the] railroad['s]responsibility.'The PUC has no authority to correct any defects(safety or otherwise)associated with the crossing. The PUC can only order others to take prophylactic measures.That General Order 75-D provides that the PUC most give permission to any entity which seeks to change the warning devices at a railroad crossing does not equate with PUC control of the property." The justice distinguished Low v. Qy of Sacramento(1970) 7 Cal.App.3d 826, which the trial judge relied on. He explained that in Low,a slip-and-fall case,a county was held to be potentially liable for a slip-and-fall accident that took place on land that the county owned but on which it had granted the city an easement. In that case,Willhite noted,the county not only owned the land,but actively maintained control by doing maintenance work on it."Here,in contrast,no evidence was offered that the PUC everactivelymaintained the railroad crossing through any form of maintenance or repair,"the justice said. The case is Public Utilities Commission V.Suuperfor Court(Millan),8217634. Copyright 2010, Metropolitan News Company 2 of 2 11/29120112:57 PM