San Diego Law Review
Document Type
Note
Abstract
This Casenote questions the holding in Hahn v. Superior Court, decided by the California Court of Appeals in 1991. In Hahn, the Court of Appeals refused to extend the doctrine of strict liability to the owner of a shopping mall based on a defective commercial establishment. The Casenote argues that the development of the doctrine of strict premises liability was arrested prematurely by the courts in California due to their effort to curb the tide of plaintiff compensation. The author argues that defective commercial establishments place the public in as much risk of harm as manufacturers of defective products. The author reasons that if the strict liability policy considerations of accident reduction and risk distribution have any meaning, they are clearly applicable to commercial licensors of defective premises, such as Hahn. She concludes that the Hahn court's reluctance to so hold is another example of courts' unwillingness to take the doctrine of strict premises liability to its logical conclusion.
Recommended Citation
Raquel M. Prieguez,
Hahn v. Superior Court: Failing to Take the Doctrine of Strict Premises Liability to Its Logical Conclusion,
29
San Diego L. Rev.
525
(1992).
Available at:
https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol29/iss3/5