Legal Opinion

Curtis v. Lein

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 11, 2009No. 62168-8-IPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAgid, J.

¶1 Tambra Curtis walked onto John and Claire Leins’ dock and her left leg went through it, causing her injuries. The Leins’ postaccident dock destruction deprived Curtis of evidence about the dock’s condition. Because Penson v. Inland Empire Paper Co.1 holds that reasonably safe wooden structures do not ordinarily give way under normal use, res ipsa loquitur provides an inference that the Leins breached their duty to provide premises free of unreasonably dangerous conditions. But Curtis must also offer evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that the Leins should have discovered the…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Young v. Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Hertog v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  3. HERTOG, EX REL., SAH v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State ex rel. Davis-Smith Co. v. ClausenWashington Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Tincani v. Inland Empire Zoological SocietyWashington Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Alhadeff v. MeridianWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Alhadeff v. Meridian on Bainbridge Island, LLCWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Curtis v. LeinWashington Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Curtis v. LeinWashington Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Smith v. StockdaleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API