Quinn v. Recreation Park Assn.
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
A hearing was granted in this ease for the purpose of giving further consideration to the question of assumption of risk l>y the plaintiff. Upon a reading of the record we are satisfied with the opinion of the District Court of Appeal, written by Mr. Justice Knight, and we hereby adopt it as the opinion of this court.
“The appellant Joan Quinn, while occupying a seat in an open section of the grand stand in Recreation Park, San Francisco, witnessing a game of professional baseball which was being played between the San Francisco and Pittsburgh ball clubs, was struck and injured by a…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Cincinnati Base Ball Club Co. v. EnoOhio Supreme Court · 1925
- Brisson v. Minneapolis Baseball & Athletic Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Wells v. Minneapolis Baseball & Athletic Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Kavafian v. Seattle Baseball Club Ass'nWashington Supreme Court · 1919
- Studer v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by68 opinions
- Knight v. JewettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Connor v. Great Western Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Jones v. Three Rivers Management Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Avila v. Citrus Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Schentzel v. Philadelphia National League ClubSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.