Legal Opinion

Mann v. O'Sullivan

California Supreme Court

Decided September 13, 1899No. S.F. No. 751PublishedCited by 10 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.

—This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries. The single question involved is, Does the complaint state a cause of action?

Defendant was the owner of a certain building in which she operated and maintained an elevator. As appears by the complaint “plaintiff was employed by said defendant to work for her in the capacity of a carpenter and to perform the work of inclosing the elevator shaft in said premises within a glass frame.” While working at this employment “said defendant, through her servant, agent, and employee, one Emmet Carney, carelessly "and negligently, and without…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kavanagh v. . WilsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
  2. Hasty v. SearsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
  3. Fagundes v. Central Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Livingston v. Kodiak Packing Co.California Supreme Court · 1894

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Thomas v. German Gen. Benevolent Soc'yCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Morgan v. J. W. Robinson Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Atchison & Eastern Bridge Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1905
  4. Engen v. Rambler Copper & Platium Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Louthan v. HewesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

5 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