Legal Opinion

Christensen v. Murphy

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 20, 1984No. TC 14561, CA A20590, SC 28701PublishedCited by 64 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarson, J.

Plaintiffs decedent, a police officer, was killed in the course of his duties allegedly as the direct result of defendant’s negligence. The trial court, however, held that plaintiffs wrongful death claim against defendant was barred by the “fireman’s rule.” 1 In so doing the trial court applied the “fireman’s rule” to a police officer (see Cullivan v. Leston, 43 Or App 361, 602 P2d 1121 (1979), rev den 288 Or 527 (1980)) and extended it to bar recovery for injuries suffered away from the premises where the negligence allegedly occurred. 2 The Court of Appeals affirmed. Christensen v. Murphy,…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Krauth v. Israel Geller and Buckingham Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
  3. Norwest v. Presbyterian Intercommunity HospitalOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Walters v. SloanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Lipson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by64 opinions

  1. Gaston v. ParsonsOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Santangelo v. State of NYNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
  3. Kreski v. Modern Wholesale Electric Supply Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Flowers v. Rock Creek Terrace Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1987
  5. Heck v. RobeyIndiana Supreme Court · 1995

59 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