Court reinstates suit brought by worker attacked at job site

A state appeals court has reinstated a lawsuit against the owner and developer of a San Francisco apartment project by a building foreman who was attacked and badly injured by three men on an unfenced walkway at the construction site.

Abraham Degala was working on demolition at the Hunters Point East-West apartments in the Bayview district in January 2017 when the men entered the building where he was working, then followed him onto a walkway, beat him and fled. They were never caught. His injuries included a severely torn shoulder rotator cuff that required surgeries and damage to his lower back, ribs, eyes and head, said Charles Dell’Ario, one of his lawyers. He said Degala is permanently disabled and also suffers from post-traumatic stress.

As an employee of a project subcontractor, Janus Corp., Degala received state workers’ compensation benefits, but he sought additional damages from the property owner, John Stewart Corp., and its general contractor, Cahill Contractors, saying they were responsible for a lack of security in a highcrime neighborhood that allowed the attackers to enter.

San Francisco Superior Court Judge Ethan Schulman dismissed Degala’s lawsuit, citing the state Supreme Court’s 1993 ruling that a company that hires an independent contractor is generally not responsible for injuries suffered by the contractor’s employees. But the court ruled in 2002 that the hiring company could be held responsible if it controls any part of the contractor’s work and uses that control in a way that helped to cause the injuries. Under that case, Degala can try to show that John Stewart Corp. and Cahill were responsible for what happened to him, the First District Court of Appeal said Friday.

The court noted that Cahill had previously posted security guards at the construction project but removed them in 2016. Security cameras in the area were turned off during working hours. Cahill had also fenced off the construction area, but after neighbors complained that their route to a nearby bus stop was blocked, the company removed fences from the walkway where Degala was later attacked, the court said. And while Cahill was generally responsible for security under its contract with the John Stewart Co., John Stewart “retained the power to decide how the site security was set up,” and worked together with Cahill to determine how much security was needed, the court said.

Based on that evidence, “a jury could infer that (John Stewart Co.’s and Cahill’s) exercise of control over site security amounted to the exercise of control over the manner in which Janus performed its demolition work,” Justice Marla Miller wrote in the 3-0 ruling. Whether the property owner’s and contractor’s actions were reasonable, and whether they were a cause of Degala’s injuries, are “questions of fact for a jury to resolve,” she said.

Dell’Ario, his appellate lawyer, said Degala formerly “worked out every day . ... He loved camping and spending time at the lake. He is now withdrawn from family and friends.”

“We’re happy to get our client back on track for justice,” Dell’Ario said.

Lawyers for John Stewart Co. and Cahill did not respond to requests for comment. The companies could appeal to the state Supreme Court.