Jivelekas v. City of Worland
Wyoming Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
ROSE, Justice.
CONTENTION OF THE PARTIES
The plaintiffs charge that damage to their home was caused from a sewer backup which occurred as a result of the defendant-city’s negligent planning, construction and maintenance of its sewer line. Plaintiffs ask money damages and injunc-five relief to compel the city “to take necessary steps to replace the sewer line.” Additionally, the plaintiffs-appellants rely upon the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to supply evidence of defendant’s failure to exercise due care.1
In response, the defendant-appellee-City of Worland contends that it was not negligent in…
2Cases cited63 opinions
- Molitor v. Kaneland Community Unit District No. 302Illinois Supreme Court · 1959
- Muskopf v. Corning Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Ayala v. Philadelphia Board of Public EducationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- Holytz v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Williams v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Worthington v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1979
- Oroz v. Board of County Com'rs of Carbon CountyWyoming Supreme Court · 1978
- Cauley v. City of JacksonvilleSupreme Court of Florida · 1981
- Town of Jackson v. ShawWyoming Supreme Court · 1977
- Davies v. City of BathSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1976
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.