Legal Opinion

Cotter v. Lindgren

California Supreme Court

Decided March 30, 1895No. 19502PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Vancliee, C.

Action for damages alleged to have been suffered by the plaintiff in consequence of negligence of the defendant in leaving unguarded an excavation which he had made in the sidewalk of a street in the town of Bakersfield, into which plaintiff fell and was injured.

The plaintiff had judgment for sixteen hundred dollars, from which and an order denying a new trial the defendant has appealed.

1. The appellant contends that the court erred in overruling his general and special demurrer to the complaint. The following is a copy of the complaint:

“ That on or about the 9th of February,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Kimball v. CushmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
  2. Donovan v. Oakland & Berkely Rapid Transit Co.California Supreme Court · 1894

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Denton v. Yazoo & Mississippi Valley RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Billing v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Jones v. George F. Getty Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1937
  4. Texas Refining Co. v. AlexanderCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1918
  5. Pilger v. City of Paris Dry Goods Co.California Court of Appeal · 1927

7 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