Legal Opinion

Dingman v. AF Mattock Company

California Supreme Court

Decided July 2, 1940No. S. F. 16372PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

This action was instituted to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff by the *623breaking of a board on which he was walking, the breaking of which caused him to fall down an open stair-well into the basement of the building in which he was working. The defendant was the general contractor for the erection of said building, and the plaintiff was the sub-contractor to whom the defendant had awarded the contract for the electric wiring of said building. The building was to be a dwelling house and was located in the city of Hillsborough. It had progressed to the point where…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Shanley v. American Olive Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Mautino v. Sutter Hospital Assn.California Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Blodgett v. B. H. Dyas Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Slyter v. Clinton Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Pipoly v. BensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Austin v. Riverside Portland Cement Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Hayward v. YostIdaho Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Otts v. BroughIdaho Supreme Court · 1965
  5. California School Employees Ass'n v. Personnel Commission of the Pajaro Valley Unified School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970

60 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