CA Premises Liability — Requests for Admission

The power of RFAs in MSJ practice: an admitted RFA becomes an undisputed fact in the separate statement without further proof. Well-drafted RFAs on the decisive issues can shift the burden before briefing begins -- or lock in concessions that prevent the other side from manufacturing triable issues later.

Notice

RFA 1. Admit that no employee of defendant inspected [specific location] during the two-hour period immediately preceding plaintiff's fall on [date and time].

Annotation: If admitted, this is the Ortega constructive notice showing -- defendant had ample time to discover the condition through reasonable inspection. Goes directly into the separate statement as an undisputed fact. If denied, defendant must explain when the last inspection happened, which opens the deposition of the inspector.

RFA 2. Admit that defendant had no record of any inspection of [specific location] between [time] and [time of plaintiff's fall].

Annotation: Slightly broader than RFA 1 -- covers the possibility that an inspection occurred but was not logged. A denial requires defendant to produce the log; an admission proves the gap.

RFA 3. Admit that defendant received no written complaint about [specific condition] in the 90 days preceding plaintiff's fall.

Annotation: Useful for the moving party to establish absence of actual notice; dangerous for the responding party if there is any complaint anywhere in the record. Responding party: check the complaint database before responding -- a denial requires you to identify the complaint.

Trivial defect

RFA 4. Admit that [specific defect] measured [X inches] in height differential as of [date of incident].

Annotation: Forces defendant to take a position on the measurement. If admitted and the measurement falls below the threshold established in Stathoulis v. City of Montebello, 164 Cal.App.4th 559 (2008), and under the holistic analysis of Stack v. City of Lemoore, 91 Cal.App.5th 102 (2023) for the applicable surface type and district, this alone may be sufficient for summary judgment on the trivial defect ground. If denied, defendant must explain what the actual measurement was -- and produce supporting evidence.

RFA 5. Admit that [specific defect] was repaired by defendant within 30 days following plaintiff's fall.

Annotation: Post-incident repair is non-admissible to prove negligence under Evid. Code § 1151, but admissible for other purposes under California law. An admission here gives plaintiff control of the exhibit without a hearsay fight.

Contractor and recreational exclusions

RFA 6 (Privette doctrine): Admit that plaintiff [name] was performing work at [location] pursuant to a contract between [plaintiff's employer] and defendant in effect on [date of incident], and that defendant did not directly supervise or control the manner of plaintiff's work on the day of the incident.

Annotation: Under the Privette doctrine, a hirer of an independent contractor is generally not liable for injuries to the contractor's employees (Privette v. Superior Court, 5 Cal.4th 689 (1993)). Admitting the contractor relationship and absence of retained control establishes the threshold defense. If admitted, the burden shifts to plaintiff to show a retained-control exception (Hooker v. Dept. of Transportation, 27 Cal.4th 198 (2002)) or equipment-supply exception (McKown v. Wal-Mart Stores, 27 Cal.4th 219 (2002)).

Responding party: scope and precision

RFAs on notice facts are the category to answer with maximum precision. "Admit that no inspection occurred" is a compound question if defendant conducts multiple types of inspection (sweep, visual, maintenance). Parse the RFA: which type of inspection, which employees, which time window. A blanket denial is often overreading the RFA in your favor; a careless admission concedes more than the facts support. The right answer is the answer that tracks exactly what the RFA asks.