In Medina v. Hillshore Partners (1995) 40 Cal. App. 4th 477, the plaintiff's decedent was shot and killed by gang members who congregated around the defendant's apartment building, chased the decedent down the block as he walked past, and murdered him. ( Id. at p. 480.) The defendant building owner was sued in tort on the theory that, knowing gang members congregated around the premises and posed a threat, it was under a duty to evict them or take other security measures. The Court of Appeal disagreed. " 'Premises liability is limited to the premises,' " it wrote. California courts, the court continued, " 'have refused to extend premises liability principles, so as to make a property owner liable for a third party's tortious conduct occurring off the premises . . . .The imposition of vicarious liability is particularly disapproved in cases where a landowner is claimed to be liable for the criminal acts of third parties.' " ( Id. at p. 482.)