Legal Opinion

Richardson v. Ham

California Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 1955No. L. A. 23537PublishedCited by 115 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTraynor, J.

Defendants, members of a construction contracting partnership, were engaged in earth moving operations in the development of a new subdivision located on top of a mesa in San Diego County. In their work they used two 26-ton Allis-Chalmers bulldozers, which were operated by two of their employees. The bulldozers did not have electrical ignition systems, and they could be started by pushing the compression lever in and stepping on the starter. The engine was stopped by pulling the compression lever out. They were equipped with fluid drives and could be started in gear, in which case they would…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Richards v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Brooks v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Mazzotta v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Ballard v. Pacific Greyhound LinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Warner v. Santa Catalina Island Co.California Supreme Court · 1955

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

3Cited by115 opinions

  1. Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Ileto v. Glock Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  4. Vesely v. SagerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Ballard v. UribeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986

110 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