Legal Opinion

Stang v. City of Mill Valley

California Supreme Court

Decided February 21, 1952No. S. F. 18485PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.

Plaintiffs brought this action to recover damages suffered as the result of a fire on their property, claiming liability against the city and its officials by reason of their failure to maintain certain fire-fighting equipment in condition for effective use in extinguishing said fire. (Public Liability Act, Stats. 1923, ch. 328, § 2, p. 675; 2 Deering’s Gen. Laws, Act 5619; now found in Gov. Code, § 53051.) Defendants filed a general and special demurrer to the amended complaint. The demurrer was sustained with leave to amend. Plaintiffs declined to plead further and judgment accordingly was…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. H. R. Moch Co. v. Rensselaer Water Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
  2. Steitz v. City of BeaconNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
  3. Bauman v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  4. Fackrell v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Miller v. McColganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Hoel v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  2. Stuart v. Crestview Mutual Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1973
  3. Vater v. County of GlennCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Bady v. DetwilerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Heieck and Moran v. City of ModestoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966

24 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