Bloom v. City & County of San Francisco
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The complaint alleged in substance that the refuse from the city and county hospital was conducted over the land of the plaintiff, through a trough, which, being defective and rotten, burst and discharged the contents over his premises; that though often notified, through its board of supervisors, the defendant neglected and refused to abate the nuisance; and that by reason thereof the plaintiff and- his son became sick and suffered great pain and expense and loss of…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam.
—We think the city and county of San Francisco had such proprietorship of the city and county hospital as rendered it liable for damages in the case as presented in the transcript. We also think the claim of plaintiff was not a claim to be presented to the board of supervisors before an action could have been maintained.
Judgment and order affirmed.
2Cited by15 opinions
- Chafor v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Jardine v. City of PasadenaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Vater v. County of GlennCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Western Salt Co. v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Madison v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.