Legal Opinion

Nestle v. City of Santa Monica

California Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1972No. L. A. 29940PublishedCited by 334 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*924Opinion

MOSK, J.

Appellants are 37 of over 700 plaintiffs who brought suit against the City of Santa Monica (“defendant”) for injuries alleged to have been suffered by virtue of defendant’s operation of the Santa Monica Airport.1 This action vividly demonstrates the difficulties encountered in en-grafting traditional common law theories of recovery onto proceedings involving injuries peculiarly contemporary in nature. (See Kramon, Noise Control: Traditional Remedies and a Proposal for Federal Action (1969) 7 Harv. J. Legis. 533; Malley, The Supersonic Transport’s Sonic Boom Cost: A Common Law…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Linkletter v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  2. Crawford v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Muskopf v. Corning Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Teel v. GaskillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Lipman v. Brisbane Elementary School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961

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

3Cited by334 opinions

  1. Careau & Co. v. Security Pacific Business Credit, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1990
  2. In Re Marriage of ArceneauxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Shamblin v. BrattainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1981
  5. Wells v. One2One Learning FoundationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006

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

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

Powered by the Exa API