Title: Kinsman v. Unocal
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: S118561M
State: California
Issuer: California Supreme Court
Date: March 1, 2006

Filed 3/1/06 
 
 
 
 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
RAY KINSMAN et al., 
)  
S118561 
 
 
) 
 
Plaintiffs and Respondents, 
)  
Ct.App. 1/3 A093424/A093649 
 
 
) 
 
v. 
)  
Super. Ct. of City and County of 
 
 
)  
San Francisco No. 308646 
UNOCAL CORPORATION, 
) 
 
) 
 
 
Defendant and Appellant. 
) 
 
___________________________________ ) 
MODIFICATION OF OPINION 
THE COURT: 
The opinion filed in this matter on December 19, 2005, is modified as follows: 
In the second sentence of the paragraph spanning pages 680-681 of 37 Cal.4th, 
the word “automatically” is inserted between “not” and “liable,” so that the sentence 
modified will read:  “We agree in the abstract that a landowner that does not retain 
control is not automatically liable for an injury inflicted by an independent contractor 
or its employees on the employee of another independent contractor.” 
In the next to the last textual sentence of that same paragraph, the text 
following the words “similar conclusion:” is modified to read:  “that, as at common 
law, the hirer/landowner who has not retained control over the work, and who was not 
itself actually on notice of a concealed hazardous condition that causes injury, should 
not be derivatively or vicariously liable . . . .” 
The modification does not effect a change in the judgment.