Newport Beach
Newport Beach
Los Angeles
Las Vegas
San Diego
Walnut Creek
North San Diego
(949)221-1000 (949)221-1001 20320 S.W. Birch Street Second Floor, Newport Beach CA 92660
(818)712-9800 (818)712-9900 21215 Burbank Blvd. Suite 500, Woodland Hills CA 91367
(702)258-6665 (702)258-6662 1160 N Town Center Dr Suite 250, Las Vegas NV 89144
(619)236-0048 (619)236-0047 501 West Broadway Suite 1700, San Diego CA 92101
(510)540-4881 (510)540-4889 2033 N. Main St. Suite 600, Walnut Creek, Ca 94596
(602)274-1204 (602)274-1205 8950 South 52nd St Suite 201, Tempe AZ 85284
(775)440-2389 (775) 440-2390 50 West Liberty Suite 1090, Reno NV 89501
(720) 779-2500 (303)256-6205 1999 Broadway, Suite 3250, Denver, Colorado 80202
(760)557-2940 (619)389-2993 760 Garden View Ct. Unit #220 Encinitas, CA 92024
(949) 221-1000 (949) 221-1001 1910 Pacific Avenue, Suite 2000 Dallas, Texas 75201

BWB&O’s Woodland Hills Team Achieves Major Victories on Equestrian and Premises Liability Cases

Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara Partner Jack Briscoe, Senior Associate Dean Solomon, and Associate Arnel Jalbuena recently achieved major victories on two cases following the filing of two separate motions for summary judgment.

In the first case, plaintiff, a minor, was a frequent horseback rider at an equestrian facility in Los Angeles. Plaintiff alleged that while she was taking a horseback riding lesson, BWB&O’s client, a ten-year-old child at the time of the incident, chased, whipped and abused her own pony in an adjacent riding arena, which caused plaintiff’s horse to spook and throw plaintiff off. After several rounds of written discovery, depositions of parties and witnesses, and motions for summary judgment brought by other defendants, the BWB&O Woodland Hills team brought a motion for summary judgment on behalf of our minor client, arguing that the primary assumption of the risk doctrine precluded plaintiff’s action. Following an hour of oral argument, the court ultimately agreed that plaintiff had primarily assumed the risk inherent in the sport of horseback riding and that plaintiff could not establish that the BWB&O client did anything to increase the risk inherent in the sport and granted BWB&O’s motion for summary judgment.

In the other case, plaintiff, a nanny, brought a child to BWB&O’s clients’ home for a music class lesson during which time the plaintiff slipped and fell, allegedly on water on the floor of the BWB&O’s clients’ home. Again, the BWB&O Woodland Hills team brought a motion for summary judgment arguing that the state of the evidence demonstrated that there was no dispute of material fact as to whether a dangerous condition existed on the floor at the time of the incident. Specifically, plaintiff was unable to prove that there was, in fact, water on the floor at the time of the incident and that even if there was water on the floor which caused plaintiff to slip and fall, there was insufficient evidence that it constituted a dangerous condition, that BWB&O’s client created the dangerous condition and/or that the dangerous condition had existed long enough for BWB&O’s client to discover and remedy it. Upon receipt of BWB&O’s moving papers, plaintiff agreed to dismiss her case with prejudice.

Please join us in congratulating Jack Briscoe, Dean Solomon, and Arnel Jalbuena on these victories!