Legal Opinion
Southern Pac. Co. v. Schwartz
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 15, 1937No. 8289PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NETERER, District Judge.
Reversal is sought of a judgment in favor of plaintiff against the defendant for failure in duty owed plaintiff, as in*193vitee upon its. premises at Tucson, Ariz., for plaintiff’s safety.
Concisely stated, it is charged, and evidence produced tended to show, that a dangerous and deceptive condition in defendant’s baggage and parcel room was maintained and permitted to exist; that plaintiff, wholly ignorant thereof, and not having been warned of such condition, walked into the same, slipped and fell to her hurt.
Eight errors are assigned, viz.: (1) Overruling defendant’s…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Sweeney v. ErvingSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Bird v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Myers v. Pittsburgh Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Touhy v. Owl Drug Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
- Nelson v. F. W. Woolworth & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1930
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pacific Can Co. v. HewesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
- Puget Sound Power & Light Co. v. Public Utility Dist. No. 1Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1941