Legal Opinion

Kataoka v. May Department Stores Co.

District Court, S.D. California

Decided November 28, 1939No. 190-YPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

YANKWICH, District Judge.

Motion of the plaintiff to dismiss the proceedings for lack of jurisdiction.

The Court is of the view that jurisdiction existed to hear the controversy. The Complaint sets forth three causes of action. In the first one no act of negligence is charged against Goddord, the employee. The negligent acts alleged in Paragraph XII are the maintenance of the escalator with the unguarded plates as an attractive nuisance.

There is no allegation that Goddord had any duties with relation to the escalator. Under the circumstances, the acts of negligence are .chargeable to the May…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pullman Co. v. JenkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  2. Barney v. LathamSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  3. Nichols v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1912
  4. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. NesterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
  5. Culp v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1937

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Associated Press v. EmmettDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1942

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API