Pollak, Vida & Barer

In Sargenti v. City of Long Beach,https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B340275.PDF ,published May 15, 2026, the Second District Court of Appeal, Division 7 affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendant city. The plaintiff was riding a dockless scooter on city sidewalks. While attempting to move from the sidewalk to a bicycle lane in the street, the plaintiff hit a blunt flat edge of an asphalt patch located over a portion of the driveway section of the sidewalk and fell from the scooter. He sued the city, alleging the city created or negligently maintained a sidewalk uplift that was a dangerous condition of public property. The city moved for summary judgment on the grounds that it did not have actual or constructive notice of the patch, that the plaintiff was not using the property with due care in a reasonably foreseeable manner, and that a release the plaintiff signed with the scooter rental company released the city from liability. The trial court concluded that a Google Earth photo purporting to show the patch years before the accident created a triable issue of fact on constructive notice. It overruled the city’s objection that the photo was not authenticated, ruling that a California Supreme Court case established that inadmissible evidence could be considered in opposition to summary judgment if the evidentiary defect could be cured at trial. The trial court granted summary judgment on the ground that the release from the scooter renter was a complete defense. After the trial court entered judgment, the California Supreme Court ruled that such releases were unenforceable as against public policy when applied to exempt public entities from liability for dangerous conditions. The plaintiff argued in the opening and reply brief on appeal only that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on that ground. It did not address the other grounds the city asserted for summary judgment.