Legal Opinion

Katz v. Helbing

California Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1932No. Docket No. S.F. 14411PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries. Defendants Helbing were partners engaged in the business of general contracting under the firm name of Helbing Company. They were owners of a piece of land on Sutter Street between Plyde and Leavenworth Streets in San Francisco, on which they were erecting a building. Defendant Isaacs was an independent contractor engaged by them to do certain of the plastering on the building. Pursuant to a city ordinance, the defendant owners obtained a permit from the board of public works to place building materials on the sidewalk. The…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Merrill v. Los Angeles Gas Elec. Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Cahill v. E. B. & A. L. Stone Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Cahill v. E. B. & A. L. Stone & Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Katz v. HelbingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Faylor v. Great Eastern Quicksilver Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Mosley v. Arden Farms Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Federal Steel & Wire Corp. v. Ruhlin Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Werkman v. Howard Zink Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1950
  4. Meierotto v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1947
  5. Jones v. City of South San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950

15 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