Legal Opinion

Marr v. Whistler

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 27, 1920No. Civ. No. 3403PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWaste, P. J.

This is an action for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff in falling through an unguarded opening in the platform of the fire-escape adjacent to her room, on a building in the city of Fresno, owned by the defendant Rowell, and in which the defendant Whistler, as lessee, conducted a hotel. The action was instituted against both the owner and lessee. They appeared separately by demurrer to the amended, complaint, that of the defendant Whistler being overruled; that of the defendant owner, Rowell, was sustained, without leave to amend, and judgment was entered in his favor. The…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Robinson v. Western Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
  2. McAlpin v. . PowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
  3. Gordon v. RobertsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Condee v. GygerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Otten v. SpreckelsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Blanton v. CurryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Rosenberg v. Geo. A. Moore & Co.California Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Roberts v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1921
  4. Weaver v. Shell Oil Co. of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
  5. Lucerne Country Club v. BealCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937

10 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