Legal Opinion

Rosewarn v. Washington Gold Mining Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided May 31, 1890No. 12281PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Hayne, C.

This was an action against the owner of a mine for damages for injuries received from a broken bell-wire while being hoisted up the shaft of the mine. Judgment was given for the defendant, and the plaintiff appeals. The evidence is not brought up, and therefore the findings must be accepted as true.

The negligence set forth in the complaint consists in the use of defective machinery. The allegation is as follows: “ That one of said wires was composed of such poor material that the same broke on the 2d of October, 1881, at or near the three-hundred-foot level of said mine, and by the…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. California Employment Commission v. Arrow Mill Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
  2. International Textbook Co. v. HolmesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914
  3. Georgia Casualty Co. v. Lindauer Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API