Legal Opinion

Conjorsky v. Murray

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 19, 1955No. Civ. 5100PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHELL, J. pro tem. *

Respondent was plaintiff in an action filed in the superior court of Riverside County. The undisputed facts are briefly as follows: Plaintiff, a woman 80 years of age and in a somewhat feeble condition, was walking east along the sidewalk on the south side of Amado Street in Palm Springs, Riverside County, in the late afternoon of May 11, 1953. Defendants Gladys Murray and her husband, William Murray, were the owners of a market on the property at the southwest corner of Amado Street and Indian Avenue in Palm Springs. Immediately to the west of the market building there…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Gray v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  2. Jones v. BayleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  3. Collins v. HodgsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  4. Brandes v. FreitasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Markham v. Hancock Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1934

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, Inc. v. ScottIndiana Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Otterbeck v. LambNevada Supreme Court · 1969
  3. People v. MathewsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  4. Callahan v. TheodoreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  5. Fox v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API