Legal Opinion

Torres v. Reardon

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 19, 1992No. B055446PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CROSKEY, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Jose Torres (Torres) appeals from the summary judgment entered against him and in favor of defendants Michael and Ona Reardon (the Reardons). Because there is no evidence that Torres’s injuries resulted from any act of negligence by, or attributable to, the Reardons, or that any circumstances existed that would impose upon them liability for Torres’s injuries under the peculiar risk doctrine, the trial court properly granted summary judgment.

Factual and Procedural Background

During the years of 1980 to 1988, Jose Torres was a self-employed gardener,…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Mary M. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  2. S. G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Industrial RelationsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Van Arsdale v. HollingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Mann v. CracchioloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Perez v. Van Groningen & Sons, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Romano v. Rockwell International, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Shamsian v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Court of Appeal · 2003
  3. Westlye v. Look Sports, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1993
  4. State Compensation Insurance Fund v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  5. Southern California Rapid Transit District v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994

30 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