Legal Question in Construction Law in California
Construction worker responsibility in an apt
Last Thursday, a carpenter(?) hired by my apt complex mgr replaced the flooring in my kitchen. When it was done I asked him to turn the pilot lights back on my stove. He did so, but when I asked him about the pilot light in the oven, he said it was not necessary. Yesterday, I turned the oven on to 400 degrees. About 5 or so minutes later, I checked it. It was not hot (there was some gas). I turned it off and then turned the stove on & realized the pilot light for the oven did have to turned on (I never had a gas stove before). This is the first time this happened. Isn't this a case of wreckless endangerment? As it was the carpenters responsibility to make sure ALL the pilot lights were on. If I had turned the stove on when I turned the oven on or before I turned the oven off---there would've been an explosion. And, no I am not suicidal. Please reply to [email protected]. Thank you. Deidre
2 Answers from Attorneys
Re: Construction worker responsibility in an apt
Deidre,
I am glad that you were not hurt. While his actions may have been incompetent, from your description, it does not sound as though you suffered any consequences from his actions. It may be prudent to inform the owner of what happened, so that he does not hire this person again.
Yours truly,
Bryan
Re: Construction worker responsibility in an apt
Merely misinforming someone does not seem to rise to the level of reckless endangerment. I was not able to find a precise legal definintion of reckless endangerment on WestLaw, but after skimming several cases in which it was alleged, it seems to require an act that is much more flagrant than merely giving out misinformation. It also seems to require a higher degree of inherent unreasonableness and intent.
It's not even garden-variety negligence. If you had sustained some harm, perhaps. We are taught in law school that the tort of negligence requires (1) X owed Y a duty of care, (2) X breached the duty, (3) Y was harmed, and (4) the breach was the factual and proximate cause of the harm.
Here, you'd lose on #3 because you sustained no actual harm, and perhaps on #1, because it would be at least somewhat doubtful that a carpenter would know anything about gas ovens.
If a gas company employee misinformed you, however, element #1 would be satisfied.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
