# Delgado v. Trax Bar & Grill

> California Supreme Court · June 30, 2005 · 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 145

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9785592

## Case

- **Full name:** MICHAEL WOLLERY DELGADO, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TRAX BAR & GRILL, Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 30, 2005
- **Citations:** 30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 145; 36 Cal. 4th 224; 2005 Daily Journal DAR 8038; 113 P.3d 1159; 2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5841; 2005 Cal. LEXIS 7057
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Brown
- **Judges:** George, Kennard
- **Cited by:** 153 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9785592

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that one who “under- takes to provide protective services to another” must exercise a duty of care

## Opinion text

*259 BROWN, J., Dissenting.
I generally agree with Justice Kennard’s dissenting opinion. The attack on plaintiff Michael Wollery Delagado was not foreseeable. Therefore, defendant Trax Bar & Grill had no duty to protect against third party criminal conduct. (Dis. opn. of Kennard, J., ante, at p. 253.).) However, unlike Justice Kennard, for the reasons set forth in my concurring opinion in Morris v. De La Torre (2005) 36 Cal.4th 260 -279, 280 [30 Ca.Rptr.3d 173, 113 P.3d 1182 ] (conc. opn. of Brown, J.)), I do not believe our decision in Kentucky Fried Chicken of Cal., Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 14 Cal.4th 814 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 756 , 927 P.2d 1260 ] imposed a duty on business owners based on ongoing criminal conduct.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9785592. Public record. Not legal advice.