In Scott v. Chevron (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 510, the plaintiffs' decedent was killed when a drunk driver struck a guardrail erected by the state to protect motorists from hitting a fixed object (a piece of equipment called a rectifier) on the roadside, which belonged to Chevron. After hitting the guardrail, the driver careened across the highway and collided with the decedent's car. ( Scott, supra, 5 Cal.App.4th at pp. 514-515.) The court affirmed summary judgment for defendant Chevron on the ground that it had owed no duty to plaintiffs as a matter of law. The court held that while Chevron might have had a duty to protect the public from striking the rectifier it had erected on the side of the highway, the connection between the placement of the rectifier and the accident was too attenuated. The drunk driver had not struck the rectifier but a guardrail placed there by the state, leading to the collision on the other side of the road. The court concluded that "the motorist injured by the drunk driver is not the foreseeable victim of the action of the property owner." ( Id. at p. 517.)