Kinsman v. Unocal Asbestos Case: Landowner Liability and The Markley v. Beagle Case

Read the discussion in the Kinsman v. Unocal asbestos case, where landowner liability with respect to the Markley v. Beagle case is discussed.

The rule that landowners may be liable to contractors’ employees for injuries resulting from latent hazardous conditions was followed in our pre-Privette cases.

In Markley v. Beagle (1967) 66 Cal.2d 951, for example, the employee of an independent contractor, en route to repair a ventilation fan on the hirer’s roof, was injured when a mezzanine railing inside the building gave way.

As the court stated: “Plaintiff was an employee of an independent contractor engaged by the tenant who operated the restaurant to service the ventilating system. He was therefore a business invitee of the owners to whom they owed a duty of reasonable care.

“They knew or should have known that he would use the mezzanine to get to the fan on the roof, and the jury could reasonably conclude that . . . the owners were negligent in failing to discover the dangerous condition of the railing and to either correct it or adequately warn plaintiff of it.” Nothing in the Privette line of cases suggests that Markley is no longer good law.

Courtesy of http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S118561.PDF

Other helpful links:

Asbestos Asbestos
Asbestos and lung cancer Asbestos and lung cancer
Mesothelioma attorney Mesothelioma attorney
Mesothelioma Lawyer Mesothelioma lawyer
Asbestos attorney Asbestos attorney