Legal Opinion
Hoffman v. City of Bristol
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided June 5, 1931PublishedCited by 110 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.
The complaint alleged, in the first count, that the defendant city was negligent in maintaining a diving board above shallow water at a bathing beach in a park owned and maintained by it and in failing to give warning of the danger connected with its use and, in a second count, that “the action of defendant in constructing and maintaining said diving board . . . was imminently and inherently dangerous and made the use of said diving board unsafe and dangerous to the people lawfully using the same, wrongfully exposed such users to injury and the same was at all times a nuisance.” It also…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- McFarlane v. City of Niagara FallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Melker v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- Hannon v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Worth v. DunnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
- Pope v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by110 opinions
- Batick v. SeymourSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Elliott v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Beckwith v. Town of StratfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
- Pestey v. CushmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Dean v. HershowitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
105 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.