Liranzo v. Liranzo
Filed 3/6/06 Liranzo v. Liranzo CA1/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
| MICHAEL C. LIRANZO, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. RANDALL LIRANZO et al., Defendants and Respondents. | A109338 (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. 02-068142) |
After plaintiff Michael C. Liranzo and defendant Randall Liranzo, his cousin, quarreled outside Randall's home, Michael temporarily left the scene.[1] When Michael returned, he found Randall holding a handgun. After Michael challenged Randall and either pushed or choked him, Randall shot Michael in the leg. Michael sued Randall for battery and negligence and sued the owner of the gun, defendant Andrew Liranzo, Randall's father, on the grounds of vicarious liability, negligence, and negligent entrustment.
The trial judge granted nonsuit on the negligence causes of action against Andrew. The jury returned a special verdict finding that Randall had intentionally shot Michael but that Michael had â€
