SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

 

I. Background 

Plaintiffs, Jose Sierra, individually, and as successor in interest to the Estate of Jose Jesus Sierra III, and Jessica Sierra (“Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendants, City of Los Angeles (“City”), County of Los Angeles, State of California, Savannah Lee Johnson, Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., and The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles for the wrongful death of decedent Jose Jesus Sierra, III (“Decedent”) arising from an automobile collision at the intersection of 47th St./Main St. in the City of Los Angeles. Plaintiffs set forth five causes of action for (1) Dangerous Condition of Public – against the City, County of Los Angeles, State of California, (2) Act or Omission of Employee of Public Entity (Gov. Code § 815.2) – against the City, County of Los Angeles, State of California, (3) Negligence – against Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc. and Elecnor Inc. (4) Negligence – against Savannah Lee Johnson, and (5) Premises Liability – against The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles. 

Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc. (“Belco”) and Elecnor Inc. (collectively, “Elecnor Defendants”) now move for summary judgment on Plaintiff’s third cause of action against them for negligence.  

Any opposition was due on or before January 26, 2024; the motion is unopposed. 

As framed by the complaint, Plaintiffs allege the Elecnor Defendants provided public works construction services at the area of 47th street and Main Street, including the installation and activation of traffic signals. (Compl. at ¶ 31.) Plaintiffs allege the necessary traffic signals were installed, but not energized, and thus inoperable at the time of the incident for an unreasonably excessive long period of time prior to and including on March 17, 2021. (Id. at ¶ 33.) As a result of the unreasonable delay in activating the traffic signals, inadequate roadway markings, and lack of adequate controls and warnings, and other features, Plaintiffs allege the Elecnor Defendants proximately caused Decedent to sustain damages from the March 17, 2021 incident. (Id. at ¶ 34-35.) 

Here, the undisputed material facts are as follows. The City awarded a public works construction project referred to as “Main Street Improvements – Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to Imperial Highway” (the “Project”) to Sully-Miller Contracting Company (“Sully-Miller”). Sully-Miller used its own employees to perform some of the General Project Tasks and contracted out the remaining scope of work. The work contracted out to Belco were the Street Lighting Modifications (Bid Items 41 through 43) and the Traffic Signal modifications (Bid Items 44 through 58). The traffic signal scope of work consisted of modifications to existing intersections identified in the bid items, including replacing vehicle signal heads, pedestrian signals, poles, wiring, signal controllers, and other components, and installation of brand-new traffic signals systems at intersections that were previously only controlled by stop signs. Sully-Miller and Belco entered into a written subcontractor agreement for the street lighting and traffic signal scope of work, and Belco performed the specified Signal Work on behalf of Sully-Miller. Belco provides that it installed new traffic signals at the subject intersection in February, but that it could not be activated until after Sully Miller and the City performed additional work on the road at the subject intersection. The additional work included resurfacing of the roadway, which involved removing the top layers of existing asphalt and installing a new asphalt surface, known as grinding and overlay, and new striping. The additional work was not performed by Belco. The proposed completion date of the additional work was March 21, 2021, four days after the subject incident. 

The Elecnor Defendants argue that although Belco installed traffic signals at the subject intersection prior to the accident, it was not responsible for the activation of the traffic signals, and that only the City could active the traffic signals after all work at the intersection was completed. Further, the newly installed traffic signal system could not be activated or energized until it was inspected and approved by the City. All of the electrical subcontracted work at the subject intersection was performed by Belco. The parent company, Elecnor Inc., did not have a contract with Sully-Miller nor was it involved in the installation of a traffic signal system.  

Accordingly, the Elecnor Defendants have met their prima facie burden establishing that they did not breach a duty of care to Plaintiffs, and that no act or omission on their part caused or contributed to Decedent’s injury at the intersection of 47th St./Main St. The burden shifts to Plaintiffs to raise a triable issue of material fact. However, because Plaintiffs did not oppose the motion, Plaintiffs necessarily fail to meet the shifted burden. Therefore, no triable issue of material fact exists, and the Elecnor Defendants are entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.   

 

III. Conclusion  

Based on the foregoing, the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc. and Elecnor Inc. against Plaintiffs’ complaint is GRANTED.  

 

Moving party is ordered to give notice.   

 

 

Dated this 8th day of February 2024