How has the Court considered the exclusion of owners, tenants and others in possession from the analysis of the California Board of Regents analysis for a property owner's claim?

In Eden v. Van Tine (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 879, 886, 148 Cal.Rptr. 215, the court relied upon the Regents analysis to reject a claim, identical to that which appellants make here, based upon the exclusion of owners, tenants, and others in possession. Quoting from Regents' description of the problems confronting a contractor, the court stated: "There is a reason for treating persons in possession differently from the contractor and architect.... [O]ne who owns the property or controls it at the time of the accident (i.e., at the time the defect constitutes the proximate cause of the damage or injury) is likely to have insurance."