Legal Opinion

Couldthirst v. Southern Pacific Railroad

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 11, 1920No. Civ. No. 2128PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

The action was brought in a justice court of Lassen County to recover damages for the killing of certain stock belonging to plaintiffs. The claim was based upon the provisions of section 485 of the Civil Code, as amended in 1915 (Stats. 1915, p. 1281), requiring railroads to maintain fences on both sides of the railroad track and making them responsible for injury to stock caused by failure to observe said duty. A demurrer was interposed upon various grounds, including the want of jurisdiction of the subject of the action and of the person of the defendant and the failure to state a cause of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. City of Madera v. BlackCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Holman v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  3. King v. Kutner-Goldstein Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Ballerino v. BigelowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Null v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Redlands High School District v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Unemployment Reserves Commission v. St. Francis Homes Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  3. Redlands High School District v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Unemployment Reserves Commission v. St. Francis Homes Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API