Legal Opinion

Shotwell v. Bloom

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 27, 1943No. Civ. 12390PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeters, P. J.

Mr. and Mrs. Shotwell brought this action against the Blooms and others to recover for the value of their personal effects which were burned up in a fire that destroyed the premises in which they were living, and which were owned by the Blooms. The Blooms cross-complained asking for $10,000 damages for the loss of the house, alleging that the fire was caused by the negligence of the Shot-wells. The jury rendered a verdict of $850 in favor of the Shotwells, and against the Blooms. The Blooms appeal from the judgment entered on that verdict. The Shotwells appeal from an order of the trial court…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Joerger v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Cutter v. HamlenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
  3. Cristadoro v. Von Behren's HeirsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1907
  4. Runyon v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  5. Kane v. MendenhallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Chavez v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Uccello v. LaudenslayerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  3. Merrill v. BuckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Neuber v. Royal Realty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1948
  5. Gregory v. PadillaAlaska Supreme Court · 1963

20 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