Legal Opinion
Carlson v. Glanville
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 7, 1959No. Civ. 5672PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGriffin, P. J.
Plaintiff-appellant Douglas Carlson, aged 12, through his guardian ad litem Hilda Goclowski, and Hilda Goclowski individually, brought this action for damages against defendant-respondent Donald C. Glanville, individually and as Glanville Plumbing Company, for loss of the minor’s left eye as a result of an explosion of an electrical dynamite cap.
Plaintiffs’ complaint alleged that defendant did “carelessly, negligently and unlawfully keep ... in a truck ... a number of dynamite caps”; that defendant knew this and that said caps were attractive to children; and that as a result of the explosion…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Green v. General Petroleum Corp.California Supreme Court · 1928
- Caspar v. LewinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1910
- Jentick v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1941
- Luthringer v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Yolo Water & Power Co. v. HudsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Davy v. Public National InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Longway v. McCallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Harris v. BeltonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Stafford v. AlexanderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Elisalda v. Welch's Sand & Gravel Co.California Court of Appeal · 1968
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.